9* 




Glass L L . 



Book. 



Uj* x~ 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/criticsofherbartOOhayw 



V? 



THE CRITICS OF HERBARTIANISM 

AND OTHER MATTER CONTRIBUTORY TO THE 
STUDY OF THE HERBARTIAN QUESTION 



OTHER WORKS BY DR. F. H. HAYWARD. 

THE ETHICAL PHILOSOPHY OF 
SIDGWICK. 

4s. 6d. 

" A book of great value to students of ethics." — The A thenceum. 

THE STUDENT'S HEEBART. 
Is. 6d. net. 

"This delightful account of Herbartianism." — Secondary 
Education. 

THE REFORM OF MORAL AND BIBLICAL 
EDUCATION. 

4s. 8d. 
" An extremely clever, even brilliant book."— Education. 

[For other and fuller press notices see end of volume.'} 



"interest is the greatest word in education" 



THE 



CRITICS OF HERBARTIANISM 



AND OTHER MATTER CONTRIBUTORY TO THE 



STUDY OF THE HERBARTIAN QUESTION 



A 



v\ 



A 



c\ 



BY 

F. H. HAY WARD 

D.Lit., M.A., B.Sc. (Lond.), B.A. (Cantab.) 

FELLOW OF THE COLLEGE OF PRECEPTORS 
ASSISTED BY 

M. E. THOMAS 

BATTERSEA POLYTECHNIC 




LONDON 

SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., LTD. 

PATERNOSTER SQUARE, E.C. 



1903 






By Lranstei 

FEB 11 M6 



PEEFACE. 

The following work was begun at Cambridge as a thesis 
for the London Doctorate of Letters, was continued at the 
Thuringian centre of Herbartianism, and was completed 
in a West of England district where, with every passing 
day, the vital need for an Herbartian propaganda has 
become to the author more and more pressing and 
manifest. 

Scotsmen, 1 with an educational tradition of some sort 
at their back, may afford >or affect to disparage Herbar- 
tianism, but a Southron who knows the paralytic con- 
dition of education in his own country and district will, if 
wise, hesitate to stand aloof from a system which — alone 
among systems or rudiments of systems — can inspire, 
move and fascinate. The sun in the heavens is, after all, 
a more useful luminary than any nebula to be generated 
a billion years hence by the clash of boreal or other 
meteorites. 

The man who has read Herbart's educational works 
unmoved has read them either without understanding 
or with prejudice. Of Herbart's psychology one may 
perhaps say with some justification : — 

Shall I take a thing so blind, 
Embrace her as my natural good, 
Or crush her, like a vice of blood, 

Upon the threshold of the mind ? 



1 Mr. Darroch is dealt with in the Appendix. 



vi Preface 

But Herbart's educational writings are another matter. 
The man who has been saved from sin will hesitate to 
revile the means of his salvation ; the man who has found 
educational light in the pages of Herbart will hesitate to 
call the light an illusion. Extinguish Herbartianism and 
you extinguish for a century the hopes of education. 
Herbart fascinates ; his critics do not. 

Two Herbartians have recently died, Professor Lazarus 
and Mr. F. G. Eooper. The writer cannot avoid taking 
the opportunity of referring to the educational loss in- 
volved in the death of the latter. The ranks of official 
educationists are distinctly poorer now that he is gone 
from among us. 

A remark as to the use of the term " Herbartianism ". 
Purists may protest, but there is real need of a word suf- 
ficiently general to embrace the entire school of thought 
to which Ziller, Dorpfeld and dozens of other German 
thinkers, and a fair sprinkling of thinkers outside Germany, 
belong or have belonged. Professor Adams, Dr. Eckoff 
and other writers have deliberately employed the term 
"Herbartianism," and the present writer therefore feels 
but few scruples of conscience in following suit. 

Again, the use of " stupid " as a translation of 
" stumpfsinnig " is not without its drawbacks. The 
writer is conscious of them ; having said so much he 
has here said enough. 

The work is not precisely a unity, it is rather a collection 
of matter dealing with the historical and polemical aspects 
of Herbartianism. British educationists will, sooner or 
later, have to come to a decision upon their attitude towards 
this question, and it is hoped that the matter of the present 
volume will be of some assistance to them in the task. 
They cannot, at any rate, complain that the weaknesses, 
or supposed weaknesses, of Herbartianism have been con- 



Preface rii 

cealed. At last we know the worst ; and now that the 
worst is known some of us feel that the best shines 
brightly. However, be it repeated, the book is a series 
of contributions rather than a definite unity. But, in 
view of the fact that British educational thought seems, 
for the moment, to have a predilection for crystallising 
itself in books of heterogeneous essays, 1 the imperfections 
of the present collection may perhaps be pardoned if not 
applauded. 

The peculiar form of the Natorp section is due to the 
fact that it was printed separately from the rest. 

Miss Thomas is responsible for the sections on Vogel 
and Linde, and desires to express her appreciation of the 
help given by Miss A. Kirby, B.A., of Plymouth High 
School. Miss Thomas has also read through the whole 
work, and made many useful suggestions on matters of 
detail. 

Several of the author's Bristol friends have again helped 
him by reading proofs ; so also has Mr. J. W. Besley, the 
able Master of Moorland School, Okehampton ; Professor 
Alexander and Miss Catherine Dodd (Owens' College, 
Manchester) also deserve his thanks ; and to Mr. E. H. 
Carter, M.A. (Board of Education), whose soundness of 
judgment and knowledge of German educational thought 
have been of much assistance, the author wishes to tender 
his warm gratitude. 

F. H. H. 

Okehampton, June, 1903. 



1 Teaching and Organisation (Longmans) ; National Education (Murray) ; 
The Nation's Need ^Constable), etc., etc., etc 



CONTENTS. 

rxas. 

Preface y. 

PART I. Introduction to the Critics op Herbartianism . 1 

PART II. Historical Survey — 

1. Herbart (1776-1841) 36 

2. Outline of Herbart's Doctrines .... 39 
3-5. The Revival of Herbartianism — 

Volkmar Stoy (1815-85) 43 

Friedrich Wilhelm Dorpfeld (1824-93) . . 46 

Tuiskon Ziller (1817-82) 49 

6. Outline of Ziller's Doctrines 53 

7. Reaction and Controversy 56 

8. More Controversy 62 

9. Present Position of Herbartianism in Germany . 65 

10. Herbartianism in Britain 69 

11. Herbartianism in America and Elsewhere . . 75 
PART III. Herbartian Literature in English .... 77 

(1) Translations 78 

(2) Expositions of Herbartianism as Distinguished 

from Translations 80 

(3) Original Works Showing the Influence of Her- 

bartian Thought 82 

PART IV. The Critics of Herbartianism — 

Section I. Dittes 98 

Section II. Wesendonck 107 

Section III. Bartels . . . . . . .112 

Section IV. Ostermann 117 

Section V. Richter 125 

Section VI. Vogel . 130 

Section VII. Sallwiirk 147 

Section VIII. Hubatsch 154 

Section IX. Drews 163 

Section X. Christinger 166 

Section XI. Bergemann 169 

Section XII. Linde . . . . . . . 173 

Section XIII. Natorp 178 

Section XIV. Kunz 203 

APPENDIX. Professor Darroch on Herbartianism . . . 209 

Index I . 215 

Index II 219 



PAET I. 

INTEODUCTION TO THE CRITICS OF 
HERBARTIANISM. 

Dueing the last twenty years two phenomena have been notice- 
able to observers of the educational world — a steady increase in 
the influence of the Herbartian system, and a series of vigorous 
attacks upon that system from various quarters of the Father- 
land. The former phenomenon has been patent to all, the 
second to those who have followed the course of events abroad. 
It is Germany, the land in which Herbartianism is indigenous, 
which has presented the world with supposed antidotes. 

These supposed antidotes, it would be no great exaggeration to 
say, have received no notice whatever in this country. Never very 
enthusiastic over educational problems, especially unenthusiastic 
over such as are not obviously "practical," the British nation 
as a whole, and many even of its professional educationists, 
have passed two decades unconscious of the fact that the most 
complete system of education hitherto given to the world has 
been going through a period of keen hostile criticism. Even 
America, where Herbartianism has attained a position of honour 
and influence, knows little of the battles it has to fight in the 
home of its birth. 

But even on the English horizon there are bright spots. 
Herbartianism itself is being studied, even if its critics are 
being ignored. This is as it should be. Whatever its alleged 
weaknesses, Herbartianism, as even its enemies admit, 1 has great 

1 Natorp, Herbart, Pestalozzi und die heutigen Aufgaben der Erziehwngs- 
lehre. Preface. 

I 



The Critics of Herbartianism 



stimulating power, and can teach us much. May-be it is not 
destined to survive for ever as the rounded and completed 
system which it appears in the eyes of its admirers. Yet the 
student of its principles is wanting in ingenuousness who refuses 
homage to the greatness of its services. 

It must, therefore, be regarded as a promising fact that works 
expository of Herbart — such as those of Mr. and Mrs. Felkin — 
are being published and read to an increasing extent. These 
books, it is true, rarely touch upon the supposed weaker sides 
of Herbartianism, and still more seldom deal historically with 
the criticisms to which the system has been exposed. 1 But the 
reason is clear. To criticise Herbart would have been useless 
until his name and his principles were known. It is impos- 
sible to criticise the non-existent, and a few years ago 
Herbartianism among us was virtually in this condition. The 
very name of its founder was only known in narrow philo- 
sophical circles as that of a philosopher somewhat akin to 
Locke, not as that of an educational writer of first rank. But 
now this has changed. Herbartianism is in a measure known, 
and the English students who yearly visit Germany in general 
and Jena in particular seem likely, either as friends or as foes, 
to spread its fame in widening circles. 

The following attempt to give an account of the chief criti- 
cisms of Herbartianism is therefore at the present moment not 
perhaps untimely. It may prove of service to the more thought- 
ful among our few educational students by stimulating them to 
grapple with the question, really of fundamental importance, 
whether or not Herbart was on the right tack. 

" To the more thoughtful." This indicates the purpose of the 
work. It is not written for the student who desires in brief 
compass an outline of the Herbartian system, of which he has 
heard, perhaps, vague reports. One effect it may have upon 
such a student will be a feeling that these Germans are masters 
at splitting straws and calling each other names. And, it must 



1 One criticism, that of Voigt, is however appropriately included in Mr. 
and Mrs. Felkin's Introduction. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 



be confessed, such an impression is to some extent correct. 
The Germans are undisputed masters of ponderous controversy. 
The present writer started with the intention of translating 
verbatim considerable portions (at least) of the critical works 
and articles hereafter mentioned, but he has relinquished the 
task in favour of presenting condensed summaries of these wordy 
effusions. Still, admitting the appearance of triviality which 
marks some of the vigorous mental life of Germany, we must 
never lose sight of the fact that many of the problems which 
agitate the minds of these controversialists are really the great 
world-problems of unfailing interest and vitality. 

Let us take a pertinent example. Many of the pages which 
follow will deal with the question of the Will, a question ever 
present alike to exponents and to opponents of the Herbartian 
system. Where lie the real springs of human action ? There 
is no exaggeration in saying that this is not only the most 
baffling of speculative problems (as evidenced by the constant 
controversies over Libertarianism and Determinism), but the 
most directly practical of all questions. Only when it is solved 
can we be certain whether our methods of religious and moral 
education are not so much beating of the air. 

If the springs of action lie in the physiological realm, the 
realm of habit and instinct (as a follower of Aristotle or a 
devotee of modern science is likely to affirm), then it is clear 
that moral education must assimilate itself to the training of 
plants and animals ; it must be a matter of drill. If, on the 
other hand, we affirm, not "Virtue is Habit," but " Virtue is 
Knowledge," or " Virtue is based on Insight " (as a follower of 
Socrates, Plato, or Herbart is likely to maintain), the main object 
of the educator must be not to drill but to enlighten. It is not 
too much to say that public opinion is hopelessly in confusion 
over this fundamental question. We find a laborious piling up 
of statistics supposed to prove that Board Schools are emptying 
the jails. We then hear of these same statistics ruthlessly called 
in question, and of confident assertions that knowledge has no 
moral effect ; that only a thorough course of drill, accompanied 
by rewards and punishments, terrestrial or celestial, can suffice 



The Critics of Herbartianis77i 



to keep the wayward feet of man in the narrow path of virtue. 
Who is right ? Are we in moral education to be Aristotelians 
or Herbartians ? Are we to put faith in Habit or in Know- 
ledge ? 

The answer probably is, that Character is twofold. It has 
its passive, mechanical, conservative, and preservative side 
given over to the sway of Habit ; hence the enormous im- 
portance of the Aristotelian factor in education, a factor 
emphasised by William James in a chapter that bids fair to 
become a psychological and educational classic. 1 But Character 
has also its active, growing, changing side, and here Knowledge, 
or, to use Herbart's favourite word, Insight, is supreme. 2 In 
the treatment of this latter aspect of the education question 
Herbart is probably matchless. His psychology may or may 
not be faulty ; his view may be hyper-intellectual and therefore 
one-sided ; but his message is one to which the world, sooner 
or later, must give heed. Society is daily manufacturing 
criminals because it cannot hear his warning voice crying : 
" The stupid man cannot be virtuous ". Nay, if it hears him 
above the babel, it rejects his words as blasphemous. 

The above is an illustration of the genuinely vital nature of 
some of the problems raised in the following pages. Herbart's 
famous declarations that " all action springs out of the circle of 
thought," that "the stupid man cannot be virtuous," that there 
should be "no instruction which does not educate the character," 
are no mere concatenations of syllables, no watchwords for hair- 
splitting competitions between rival German professors. Even 
when we come to the apparently more academic question 
agitated between Natorp and the Herbartians, the question 
whether a presentation 3 - mechanism is an adequate explanation 

1 Talks to Teachers, ch. viii. See also his larger work, Principles of 
Psychology. 

2 There is the analogy of a tree with its half-dead stem and its growing 
point. Each of the two is necessary. 

3 " Presentation " is a very general word for " impression," " idea," etc., as 
most readers will scarcely require to be told, and represents the German 
" Vorstellung ". 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 5 

of mental facts, or whether a higher principle is involved in 
what we call self-consciousness (really another form of the 
above question), the problem is genuinely vital. If we solve it 
in the Herbartian sense, and accept the deterministic hypothesis, 
the task thrown upon teachers is enormous. 

It would be no exaggeration to say that we have no right 
either to hope or to fear for the human race until this and 
similar questions have received solution. 

And here, perhaps, an avowal may be appropriately made. 
When, several years ago, the present writer began to study the 
Herbartian question, two brilliant works, destined to exercise no 
small influence over British education, had not then appeared. 
These were Herbartian Psychology Applied to Education 1 by 
Professor Adams, and Dr. Findlay's Principles of Class Teach- 
ing? The former is probably the most readable book on educa- 
tion that has ever been written in English, 3 and, fortunately, its 
raciness and readableness are by no means purchased at the 
expense of solid wisdom. The second is almost the only 
attempt to nationalise Herbartianism among us by retaining 
its most valuable features, and judiciously supplementing or 
correcting its defects. With neither of these books will the 
present work essay to compete ; its design is, in fact, as different 
from theirs as its execution may seem to be far less interesting 
to the majority of readers. If, then, the field is already occupied 
by two brilliant books and half a dozen others, perhaps less 
brilliant though equally necessary and valuable (translations 
and expositions of Herbart), why should another writer enter 
the field with one or two additional volumes under his arm ? 
Has he anything fresh to contribute? He has, even if the 
neglected critical side of the Herbartian question had not been 
the object of much of his work. 

English books on Herbartianism — including the two most 
brilliant of all — seem strangely deficient in one respect. The 
moral significance of the system is well-nigh ignored. To the 

1 Isbister. 2 Macmillan. 

^Though the works of Thring and James " run it close ". 



The Critics of Herbartianisni 



writers Herbartianism appears as a thing mainly or exclusively 
for the class-room ; they rarely convey the impression that it 
is an ethical, social, or religious propaganda, and one that bears 
upon the most vital problems now crying for solution. But this 
is the aspect which specially strikes the present writer. When 
Herbart, by a daring flight of ethical speculation, put " Voll- 
kommenheit " among the " moral ideas," he thereby placed the 
pedagogic profession on the "sacred" platform; lifted the 
pursuit of Culture up towards the level of the pursuit of Virtue, 
or rather — it would be but slightly erroneous to say — identified 
within limits the two pursuits ; and mapped out a plan of 
social reform more daring and more positive — probably, also, 
more likely to prove permanently effectual — than the crude 
plans which, under the name of " philanthropy," go far to 
demonstrate how little modern society cares for "prevention" 
so long as " cure " is more thrilling and dramatic. 

In the Student's Herbart 1 this aspect of Herbartianism — 
ignored or merely suggested by British writers on the subject 
— has been especially emphasised, and in a projected larger 
book the question may be considered at greater length. It is 
because, to the writer, the system founded by Herbart is a 
moral gospel for men perishing through stupidity and absence 
of ideas, that he is burrowing into its often unattractive literature 
and serving up, for British readers, more than one instalment 
of the product. Even when, as in the present work, which is 
largely critical and historical, there are but few opportunities 
of proclaiming with loud and emphatic iteration the moral 
significance of Interest, such opportunities as present them- 
selves should not be ignored. Much will Herbartianism do for 
the school ; but unless it succeed in transforming that insti- 
tution into a temple, and the teaching profession into a pro- 
fession claiming " holy orders," other results (e.g., the unification 
of the curriculum) will be of but small moment. Herbartianism 
in its claims is nothing less than an educational High Church 
movement with the transubstantiation of ideas into virtue as 

1 By the present writer. (Sonnenschein.) 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 7 

its central marvel; it is not (as one would too often gather 
from most of the current works on the subject 1 ) merely an 
academic system from which pedagogues can pick up a few 
useful hints. 

If any gospel has a warning message that gospel is Herbar- 
tianism, and the message is that the stupid (stumpfsinnig) man 
cannot — cannot — be virtuous. If any gospel can claim to be 
constructive and inspiring it is that one which hails many-sided 
interest as " a protection against passions, an aid to one's earthly 
activity, and a salvation amid the storms of fate ". If any gospel 
can claim powers for its priests it is the one which proclaims 
how, by the manipulation of the principle of Apperception, the 
interaction of a group of ideas will be made to generate Interest 
and pass over into Virtue and Character. In the present work 
there will be no opportunity to expound in detail this magnifi- 
cent doctrine, with the substantial correctness of which Her- 
bartianism must stand or fall. But in view of the neglect of 
this aspect of the Herbartian question there was good reason 
for emphasising it here. If Interest is really a protection against 
evil, nay, itself an element in moral good, and if Herbart has 
shown how, in normal cases, such Interest can be aroused, then 
Herbartianism is a gospel and nothing less. And, after all, it 
is more important that Education should become a " gospel " 
than that it should become a "science," though when seen 
through an Herbartian medium it begins to appear as both. 

Some even of the enemies of the system admit that there is 
a certain value in the doctrine of many-sided Interest. But on 
the whole the gospel is a new one, and surely as necessary as it 
is new. When at Eoman Catholic conferences (and the same 
spirit is present also in many other religious assemblies), we 
find ecclesiastics avowing that they "do not attach much im- 
portance to the teaching of arithmetic or geography or other 



1 The reason why even Professor Adanis and Dr. Findlay do not touch 
upon this side of the question is perhaps that the design of their works 
scarcely allows of it. But they might have given some pointed indication 
of the moral significance of Herbartianism. 



8 The Critics of Herbartiahisnt 



subjects," 1 we naturally and rightly infer that any teacher who 
acquiesces in the spirit voiced by these words is an appendage 
rather than a man. Nine-tenths of his work is work to which " he 
does not attach much importance ". What a chasm separates 
the holders of this view from the believers in Herbartianism ! 
The Herbartians attach very great importance to these and 
other despised subjects. An Interest in such things is, in 
their view, a life-force of incalculable value, saving, or help- 
ing to save, from many a sin, which, if we are to judge from 
appearances, all the sacraments in existence seem powerless to 
suppress. " Arithmetic " and " geography " may not be, on the 
Herbartian view, so character-forming as history and literature, 
but no Herbartian would rank his work so low as to utter words 
of disparagement concerning even the humblest subjects in the 
curriculum. The wonder is how any teachers can endure to be 
told point-blank by their ecclesiastical leaders that their work 
is of small importance. But possibly they agree with their 
rulers. "The degree of estimation in which any profession is 
held becomes the standard of the estimation in which the 
professors hold themselves." 2 

The Herbartian believes in the moral value of " secular" as 
well as " sacred" subjects ; he believes in many-sided Interest ; 
ipso facto he believes in himself and in the future of education. 
Interest in anything worthy is a moral force dominating life, 
keeping from evil, opening up vistas. Interest protects, Interest 
guides, Interest elevates. Two boys may be otherwise identical, 
but if one of them is influenced by a saving Interest in natural 
science or in history which the other does not possess, such an 
Interest is not a thing to which Catholics, or any other people, 
ought " to attach little importance ". Many-sided Interest actually 
performs, under our very eyes, the task which the sacraments 
profess to perform ; it builds up character and works for moral 
salvation. 

The distinction between the " sacred " and the " secular " 



1 Bishop of Clifton at the Newport Conference, 22nd September, 1902. 

2 Burke, Reflections on the French Revolution. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism g 

things of life is probably the most fatally mischievous distinc- 
tion ever drawn by the perverse ingenuity of man. And yet 
let us retain it — though with a changed application. There 
are " secular " things ; there are " sacred " things. Nine-tenths 
of the Bible reading in our schools is practically "secular," 
exerting no special influence whatever upon character. Even 
the sacraments appear every whit as ineffective and " secular," 
if we are to judge from the records of prisons, poor-houses, 
and inebriate homes, the sacramentalists often contributing 
the highest percentage of inmates to these institutions. The 
question is whether Herbartianism, once intelligently and 
enthusiastically grasped and applied by an army of many 
thousand teachers, would not accomplish more for the moral 
elevation of man than the devices and denunciations of many 
generations have accomplished. 

But there are others that Herbartianism hits hard, even harder 
than the sacramentalists. " Save the drunkard, rescue the fallen, 
shut up this, abolish that," are the cries we hear from our very 
best men, the salt of the earth; men who, in moral fervour, 
are often miles in advance of such persons as "do not attach 
much importance either to arithmetic or geography," or, 
often, even to temperance and such like philanthropic but 
"secular" movements. Yet these cries, too, sound pitiably 
feeble and thin when once the sonorous trumpet-call of many- 
sided Interest has broken' upon the ear. Modern philanthropy 
is almost wholly reformatory, corrective, and negative : in 
sharp contrast to this is Herbartianism ; ever positive, pre- 
ventive, constructive. ' So long as any genuine Herbartian has a 
voice and a pen he will urge upon an unbelieving public — which 
nominally acknowledges an overruling Benevolence, but daily 
reduces him to moral impotence by attributing evil to any cause 
except the mental limitations of man — that most if not all 
moral evils are gratuitous and unnecessary, the results of empti- 
ness of mind, unintelligence, rigidity of thought, absence of 
wholesome interests. " Absurd optimism," some one will say ; 
"a Socratic and Platonic error long ago exploded." Yet evil 
must be absolute if it is not ultimately the result of intellectual 



io The Critics of Herbartianism 

defects, such as ignorance and sluggish or diseased imagination. 
"The stupid man cannot be virtuous," and conversely the en- 
tirely smstupid man cannot be vicious ; or if he can, the moral 
government of the universe is a delusion, and the monarchs of 
hell may, for all we know, be holding sway in the councils of 
heaven. That and nothing less is the inference we must draw if 
the great central doctrine of Herbartianism is false : the doctrine 
that "action springs out of the circle of thought," and that 
therefore "the smaller the amount of mental activity the 
less can we look for Virtue ". In the strange posthumous 
book of F. W. H. Myers l we are told that to disembodied 
spirits "evil seems less a terrible than a slavish thing. It is 
an isolating madness from which higher spirits strive to free 
the distorted soul." Would moral evil exist but for ignorance 
and but for mental disease ? 

When the Herbartian seeks to penetrate into the dim recesses 
from which issues the human Will, he discerns there, not the 
form of a fiend, baffling daily the armies of heaven, but rather 
a chaos of forces, innocent though untamed and undirected, 
working out their destiny in the mysterious gloom. And the 
Herbartian asks, with wonder, why these dark recesses should 
remain dark; and why a nation which prays for deliverance 
"from pride, vainglory, and hypocrisy; from envy, hatred, and 
malice, and all uncharitableness, from fornication and all other 
deadly sin," forgets that these, like "lightning and tempest," 
are effects, and may some day be tracked to their causes. 

It takes a higher order of mind to aim at the prevention 
of evil than at its cure. The first is the high aim of Her- 
bartianism, whereas amy housewife, provided she has a warm 
heart, can aim at cure — and give alms to every beggar. 

"An expansion of the concept of morality is required," said 
Herbart almost at the outset of his career as an educational 
author. The battle which he fought was that of the claims of 
" culture " ; the same battle revived years ago by Matthew 
Arnold. The word is a bad one and rouses many a prejudice. 

l Human Personality and Its Survival of Bodily Death. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartiatiism 1 1 



But there is no better word for the purpose, and apologies are 
after all unnecessary, for the strenuous Hebraic elements sup- 
posed to be absent from the notion of Culture are already rooted 
in our midst and are never likely to leave us. Our duty 
is therefore to exalt Hellenism while not derogating from the 
glories of Hebraism. And " Culture " in the eyes of its English 
advocate was, after all, no nerveless dilettantism: ''there is a 
view in which all the love of our neighbour, the impulses 
towards action, help, and beneficence, the desire for removing 
human error, clearing human confusion and diminishing human 
misery, the noble aspiration to leave the world better and 
happier than we found it — motives eminently such as are 
called social — come in as part of the grounds of culture, and 
the main and pre-eminent part. . . . Culture is a study of 
perfection." 1 This is Herbartian Ethics deprived of its technical 
and deterrent form. The " Culture " gospel may be overdone, 
though there is small chance of this in Britain ; the danger is 
that we shall ignore rather than exaggerate. But we ignore 
at our peril. When a Herbart can tell us that "stupid men 
cannot be virtuous" ; when a Matthew Arnold can bewail the 
moral and social results of an absence of mental "flexibility," 
and a George Meredith, as if in echo, can explain much of the 
viciousness of the poor as a result of the " dulness and im- 
penetrability of their minds," 2 it is time for us to ask whether, 
after all, culture and morality are not more closely connected 
than we have dreamt. 

The writer has elsewhere 3 indicated what he regards as the 
real significance of Herbart's " second moral idea ". Practically 
speaking that idea represents the forgotten claims of Greek 
thought. Greatness, width of mind, culture, Interest appear on 
the Herbartian scene as demanded by the moral intuitions of 
man. Virtue is no longer abstinence, but an effort after a total 
perfection, of which abstinence is only a phase. 



1 Culture and Anarchy, pp. 5-6. 

2 Ordeal of Richard Feverel. But does Mr. Meredith say this for himself? 

3 The Student's Herbart, pp. 39 ff. 



12 The Critics of Herbartianism 



Objectors will say — Dittes and others have said it repeatedly 
— that culture and many-sided Interest are not virtue. Herbart 
never said that they were. The "second moral idea" is only 
one of five, and if the other four are ignored the person is not 
" virtuous ". But, conversely, a person is not completely " vir- 
tuous " if the "second idea" be ignored. That is to say, an 
English aristocrat devoid of ideas, a country ploughman or a 
humble housewife with stunted mental development and no 
interests, or "daughters of well-to-do parents, whose minds 
have been disciplined by no harder work than a study of novels 
and talk about the clergy," 1 are not types of moral perfection 
even though they may be honest, benevolent, well-meaning, 
not grossly sensual, and so forth. They may keep every pro- 
hibitory commandment, but they cannot be virtuous in the 
Herbartian sense ; a chilling numbness rules nine-tenths of their 
nature ; a fatal paralysis confines them in a moral prison house. 
" Stumpfsinnige honnen nicht tugendhaft s&in." 

To a man who has once drunk deep of the Herbartian spring 
mankind appears in a new light, no longer as a multitude of 
beings each torn by an internal conflict between the angel and 
the devil within, but rather as a multitude of sightless hydrozoa 
immersed in an inhospitable medium and feeling outwards with 
every tentacle for the mental nourishment which never comes. 

Said Gray of the poor of England : — 

Knowledge to their eyes her arnple page 
Rich with the spoils of time did ne'er unroll ; 

in the great poem whose beauty has too long detracted from 
its educational significance. To the Herbartian, the poor 
— nay the rich also, scarcely less often — are mutely craving for 
something they do not possess, and indeed cannot define, but 
the absence of which shows itself in a moral disease, whose 
diagnosis has been muddled too long by their spiritual physicians. 
" Sin — sin — sin " has been shouted from every pulpit, and the 

a The words are Mr. Hooper's (School and Home Life, p. 315). Many- 
sided Interest is a gospel for women as well as for men, and would do much 
to save them from hysteria, nervous irritation, self-concentration and self-love 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 13 

Herbartians, careless of criticism or convention, retort, "The 
stupid man cannot be virtuous ". Where in his anaemic mind 
and palsied will lie any springs of noble action ? Can any good 
thing come out of such a Nazareth ? 

Evil does not spring from nothing or from Free Will. It has 
its causes. It is a disease rather than a miracle. It is to be 
cured rather than inveighed against. 

To claim Herbartianism as a remedy for all the evils which 
afflict mankind would be veritable folly, though not greater folly 
than to claim as such any single religious or economic prescrip- 
tion. There are champions of both the latter. The Socialist 
traces all or most ills to poverty, and Gray himself rightly saw 
in poverty one cause of the mental and moral degradation of the 
poor. 

Chill penury repressed their noble rage 
And froze the genial current of the soul. 

But it is certain that man cannot live by bread alone, and the 
preacher, seeing this, brings forward his prescription, and traces 
all or most ills to the neglect of the " gospel ". But he, too, 
sees only an aspect, and a superficial aspect, of the disease ; 
sees, in fact, symptoms rather than causes. " Men will not 
accept the gospel," we are told. But why should we expect 
them to feel the historical meaning of any great World-Tragedy, 
if history and literature — the "humanistic" studies which 
make us sensitive to nobleness, to pathos, to martyrdom, to 
divinity — have been kept afar off? Why should they rever- 
ence Christ if they are never taught to reverence Alfred or 
Sidney? The thing is absurd. We exclude the " humanities " 
from the school, or, what is worse, we teach them soullessly, 
or, what is worse agaio, we confuse them with dates, and 
grammar, and construing — and then we complain that the 
"gospel" is neglected. 

Tennyson sings truly that the course of time and progress 
will — 

Crook and turn upon itself in many a backward streaming curve ; 
for the catechetical Christian schools of Alexandria were cen- 



14 The Critics of Herbartianism 

turies in advance of modern England in their grasp of the 
problem of spiritual education. To the wise Fathers of that 
city there were laws of spiritual apperception long since for- 
gotten until re-discovered by Tuiskon Ziller. 1 Greek thought, 
prophetic thought, historical study were necessary preliminaries 
for the student before the Christian mysteries and spiritualities 
could be discerned. There was less said about the "neglect 
of the gospel," and rather a solemn and earnest effort to show 
how, in the view of these, the wisest of the early Christians, 
Christianity was a culmination, and as such only capable of 
being grasped in all its force and significance by minds pre- 
pared. But we have forgotten the lesson. With well-nigh 
every humanistic element excluded from the school ; with the 
fact that, when viewed in the light of the vast moral importance 
of the subject, history is practically unknown and untaught 
in modern England ; with the other fact, which would strike an 
observer as equally appalling, were it not ludicrous in its very 
imbecility, that great literature makes no appeal to the modern 
Englishman and but little appeal to the modern English woman ; 
we still have the audacity to complain that the soul-message of 
a Tragedy, enacted in some unknown country called Palestine, 
then under the rule of an unknown nation called the Eomans, 
but formerly under kings of its own, unknown except by name, 
warned and inspired by unknown men called " prophets " — that 
a Tragedy taking place under such unknown conditions exerts 
but little attractive force on mankind ! Again be it said, the 
thing is absurd. If we wish the "gospel story," or any other 
story, or any other humanistic force, to act upon mankind, we 
must restore the "humanities" to the school. Thousands of 
English souls are literally perishing from lack of the historical 
knowledge which humanises. 

Knowledge to their eyes her ample page 
Rich with the spoils of time did ne'er unroll. 

The truth is that the preacher, if a man of culture, has no 



1 Consider the late position of the Life of Christ in his scheme of study. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 15 

point of contact with his audience ; he speaks a foreign 
language ; he talks of colours to the blind. The " apperception 
masses " — the requisite ideas — of his auditors are so few and 
attenuated that he, and the moralist, may appeal for a life- 
time without touching any inner spring of action. "Durness 
and impenetrability," not deliberate choice of evil for good, are 
the causes of much present-day spiritual decline and much of 
the desertion of the churches recently revealed. And with this 
" dulness and impenetrability " towards what is suggestive of 
higher things goes necessarily a heightened susceptibility to 
all that is degrading. " If intellectual interests are wanting, 
if the store of thought be meagre, then the ground lies 
empty for the animal desires." So says Herbart, wiser a 
thousand times than those who shout "sin — sin — sin". 

It is the supreme glory of Herbartianism to have shown how 
intimately connected are Intelligence and Virtue, Unintelligence 
and Vice. It is the supreme error of many philanthropists not 
to have recognised that the secret of failure is often absence of 
ideas, scrappiness of ideas, feebleness of ideas. The intolerant 
man is intolerant because he has lived only in one mental world ; 
the cruel man is cruel often because his imagination is weak ; l 
the impure man is impure largely because he has nothing to 
interest him except impurity; the Hooligan is a Hooligan 
because he has never been taught to be anything else. 

"Human nature," says Euskin, "is kind and generous, but 
it is narrow and blind, and can only with difficulty conceive 
anything but what it immediately sees and feels. People 
would instantly care for others as well as for themselves if 
only they could imagine others as icell as themselves." 2 

We have wandered for the moment from the doctrine of 
many-sided Interest to that of Gesinnungsunterricht or the 
teaching of " humanities," and to that of " Apperception ". But 
in truth they are all connected. The moral value of the first 

1 Still there may be " Schadenfreude," pleasure in another's pain, as 
Miss Cobbe urges. {Contemporary, May, 1902.) But probably most cruelty 
is due to defective imagination. Schadenfreude is, let us hope, insanity. 

2 Relation of Art to Morals. (Quoted, Felkin.) 



1 6 The Critics of Herbartianism 



doctrine, even when applied to subjects such as arithmetic and 
geography, is enormous ; while when applied to humanistic 
studies (history, literature, etc.) it becomes incalculable. The 
doctrine of Apperception is, of course, applicable to all subjects, 
at least to all that involve the imparting of knowledge as dis- 
tinct from skill or dexterity. A few words more upon it may 
therefore not be wholly useless, in view of the fact that the 
majority of expositors, with all their lucidity, fail to show its 
moral and social significance. 

This significance will be discovered by any person who will 
take the trouble to try or to conceive an experiment. Let him 
go into a country village with eager heart, pure motives, and 
boundless energy. He is determined to lay before the people 
" whatsoever things are lovely " in religion, in literature, in 
science, in history. It is all " lovely " to him ; how easy it must 
be to rouse others to a sense of the same loveliness ! How easy 
to thrill Englishmen and Christians with a sense of the grandeur 
of their national history, with the beauty of their national poetry, 
or with the true and deep pathos of that scene when a single man 
inspired the Jews in their mountain fortress to throw defiance at 
Sennacherib and the greatest army in the world ! Easy ! Alas, 
it is not easy ! Mention " Alfred," and the rustic imagination 
remains unkindled; "Wessex," "Norseman," and every other 
proper name mentioned falls as a meaningless sound : the 
apperceiving ideas are not there, and Interest is not awakened. 
Tell of the origin of Adonais, and the rustic asks " Who was 
Keats ? " and the expositor has to begin the weary task at 
another point ; again the apperceiving ideas are not there, and 
Interest is not awakened. Turn at last to the Bible, " the poor 
man's book," the common heritage of Christians ; surely here 
we shall find something that the rustic can appreciate ! Tell 
of Sennacherib, tell of Isaiah. In the midst of the narrative 
comes the question — if, indeed, an ox-like stare be not the 
only response which the enthusiast obtains — "Who were the 
Assyrians ? " Well-nigh in despair the speaker produces a 
map, proceeds to point out Mesopotamia, and — inter alia — 
discovers that though "religious education *' is the order of the, 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 1 7 

day not one person out of ten can point out Palestine on the 
map of the world ! Sennacherib and Isaiah, like Guthrum 
and Alfred, awaken no interest ; there is no background of 
knowledge into which the new material can be received ; the 
apperceiving ideas are not there, and Interest is not aroused. 

Thus we come back to the old place ; preaching, teaching, 
exhortation, books, can exert but little influence unless, early 
in life, vistas have been opened up before the mind. " The 
conceptions acquired before thirty remain usually the only ones 
we ever gain." l Immense is the value of ideas. The man who 
has them in rich abundance may perchance sink, on occasion, 
into debauchery or greed, but he is always open to influences ; 
there is always the chance of revolutionising his character. The 
hopeless person is the impenetrable person, the man whose 
"apperceiving masses" are poor, scanty, or non-existent. Pro- 
fessor James's jokes at the expense of the "apperception" 
doctrine 2 are therefore out of place. He complains that "the 
conscientious young teacher is led to believe that it contains a 
recondite and portentous secret". It does contain a secret, 
and a portentous one. 

The chief aim of the present work — which is to lay before 
Anglo-Saxon readers the critical literature bearing on Herbar- 
tianism — precludes the devotion of much further space to a 
panegyric of the "Interest" and kindred doctrines. But if 
these doctrines possess vitality, clearly Herbartianism has by no 
means been criticised out of existence — an impression which 
might possibly arise after a perusal of the hostile criticisms 
which are summarised in this book. No, Herbartianism lives 
and moves and develops. Its critics do good service when 
they point out possible dangers and when they demonstrate 
obvious errors, but as the system is grounded upon many a 
deep moral and psychological truth, though its outworks may 
fall to ruin its main walls will surely stand. 

" ' Interest — Interest — Interest ' ; all very well : but let us 
have definite practical hints" A teacher will respond in this 

1 James, Talks to Teachers, p. 168. 2 Ibid., p. 156. 

2 



1 8 The Critics of Herbartianism 

wise. Well, Herbartians can give many, but the truth is that 
British Education is already well supplied with " practical 
hints " (of a sort), and that these, so far as they are good, will 
find their proper places in the Herbartian system. The need 
is for a new spirit, a definite point of view, a programme, a 
creed ; precisely these are provided in the Interest doctrine. 
Teachers who once feel that in creating powerful, permanent 
Interests they are regenerating the world as no other body of 
professional men are capable of doing, will soon discover 
" practical hints " for themselves, and (far more important) 
they will realise that school work has a meaning; that the 
preparation of their lessons is drudgery no longer, but truly 
a preparation for the "Kingdom of God on earth"; and that 
they have a right to look in the face of the clerical and the 
medical professions with the glance, if not of superiority, yet 
at least of equality, instead of with the cringing glance of 
conscious abasement. Is this nothing ? Cannot we balance 
a good many "practical hints" against such a boon? The 
function of Herbartianism is not to add a new and equally dreary 
set of " school-management " books to the lumber-room of a 
schoolhouse, but to give a soul, spirit, life, and meaning to the 
whole of the schoolmaster's work. We need no Herbartianism 
to tell us how geography should be taught ; even now we teach 
it fairly well. But we do need Herbartianism to explain to us 
in what spirit we should teach it ; we do need Herbartianism 
to tell us we are a profession ; we do need it to provide us with 
a programme for the future, with a tradition, with a philosophy, 
with a court of appeal, with self-respect, with leaders, with 
encyclopaedias, 1 with stimulus, with hope, with zeal — with every- 
thing, in fact, which we do not possess and which the medical 
profession in a measure does. 

One parting word on the " Interest " doctrine. Is there any 

1 It is not without significance that the magnificent Encyclopaedia of 
Education, published at Langensalza, is edited by the modern leader of 
German Herbartianism. The reference is, of course, to Rein's Encyclo- 
pcedisches Handbuch der Pddagogik (16 volumes). 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 19 



truth in the charge brought forward by Dittes that Herbartianism 
is devoid of heroism ? Was Her barf s apathy, at a time when 
Fichte and other Germans were engaged in the war against 
Napoleon's aggression, a symptom of the paralysis which 
" Culture" sometimes induces, and a gloomy presentiment of 
the flabbiness of his educational system ? He would be a bold 
man who, in face of Herbart's spotless life and the enthusiasm 
of his followers, would seriously claim this. But there may be 
a trace of truth in the charge. " Interest" with Herbart was 
mainly to be of the "involuntary" kind. An Herbartian 
teacher, consistent to the doctrine of the presentational-mech- 
anism, would aim mainly at the smooth working of the forty 
or sixty presentational-mechanisms sitting before him in class 
and called his " pupils ". " We have of late been hearing much 
of the philosophy of tenderness in education ; ' Interest ' must 
be assiduously awakened in everything, difficulties must be 
smoothed away. Soft pedagogics have taken the place of the 
old steep and rocky path to learning." So speaks a great 
American writer, 1 and (must we not admit ?) there may be now 
and then an absence of strenuousness, vigour, and backbone in 
Herbartianism; it may easily degenerate into the "soft peda- 
gogics " said to be prevalent in Herbartian America. It may — 
or it may not. Professor Adams's reply is at least pertinent. 
" The theory of Interest does not propose to banish drudgery, 
but only to make drudgery tolerable by giving it a meaning." 2 
"Interest," says Schurman, "is the greatest word in Educa- 
tion " ; let us now finally add, " in morals and religion too ". 

Some further remarks will be of service in calling attention to 
other really valuable aspects of Herbartianism, aspects likely 
to be partly lost sight of during an examination of the weak 
points of the system. Partly — not entirely; for reasonable- 
minded critics like Dittes, Bartels, and Christinger are by no 
means insensitive to its excellences. 

Connected with the doctrines of Interest and Apperception is 
the one that Instruction cannot be dispensed with or safely 

1 James, Talks to Teachers, p. 54. 

2 Herbartian Psychology, pp. 262-63. 



The Critics of Herbartianism 



underestimated. Osterrnann followed the example of his 
master Lotze in attacking Herbart's presentational psychology. 
That psychology is probably but an overdone, over-systematised 
attempt to explain the fact that ideas or presentations are of 
supreme importance for mental life. Now the strange thing is 
that some people deny this to be a fact at all. 

There are those who tell us that "mere knowledge" is of 
small moment ; that the main thing for educationists to look 
after is training in good habits, not Teaching or Instruction. 
They tell us that we must form in children certain tendencies 
rather than confer upon them information. Among those who 
adhere to this view are the ecclesiastical and other worthies who 
oppose " ethical lessons " on the ground that " virtue cannot be 
taught ". To the same group belong advocates of a pre- 
dominantly classical education on the ground, not of the know- 
ledge it confers, but of the "unrivalled mental gymnastic" 
which is provided by construing Homer and composing Latin 
verses. 1 The same depreciation of knowledge is shown by the 
champions of the "heuristic system " of science teaching, who 
protest against "lecture methods," and declare that "the great 
object in view in education is to develop the power of initiative ". 2 

The notion is that, provided certain capacities or tendencies 
are developed in our pupils, these capacities or tendencies will 
be always operative, no matter whether the mind be filled with 
mathematical, classical, or other knowledge, or with little 
knowledge of any kind. A man "trained" in the classics is 
ready for anything. He is "knowing," even though he may 
have little knowledge. He has " Konnen " if not "Kennen". 

What are we to say to this ? 

There are two opposite dangers to be faced by modern educa- 
tionists. One is "didactic materialism" — the view that the 
more knowledge we can pile up (never mind how !) the better. 

1 "A master's business," says Mr. Benson, "is to try to see that there is 
mental effort." "Not a bit of it," replies Sir Oliver Lodge, in the spirit of 
a genuine Herbartian, "a master's business is to supply proper pabulum" 
{Nineteenth Century, December, 1902). 

2 Dr. Armstrong's Special Report on the Heuristic Method. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianis?n 2 1 

Quantity is here regarded as the main thing. The logical out- 
come of this educational policy is that habits of initiative, of 
independence, and so forth, are not cultivated. Advocates of 
" training " rightly protest against this. " Didactic materialism " 
is the present-day creed of elementary schools and of all other 
schools influenced by the tradition of examinations. 

The opposite danger'is " didactic formalism " (if the coining 
of the phrase may be allowed). "Smash up the knowledge 
idol," said Edward Thrinsj. " Create initiative" is the watch- 
word of "didactic formalism ". 

Now the " Artful Dodger " : and many of his fraternity 
possessed "initiative " in abundance and yet there was some- 
thing seriously deficient in their characters. Waiving the 
question of innate criminality (with which the normal teacher 
has little to do), may we not say that the defect in the Dodger's 
character was that his ideas were wrong ? 

On the whole, the tendency — not necessarily the actual 
result — of Herbartianism may sometimes be in the direction of 
"didactic materialism". If "action springs out of the circle 
of thought," vast importance, perhaps exaggerated importance, 
will be attached to the conferring of Knowledge. There may 
be an undervaluing of " training," of the formation of habit and 
of the strenuous sides of character. Herbartianism, we are told, 
is hyper-intellectual. It lays too much stress on Instruction. 

Such is possibly its occasional tendency. But the Her- 
bartians are practical men, and fully alive to the dangers of 
their presentational psychology. Thus they wage war against 
the purely "narrative" method of teaching, and lay stress 
on " developing-presentative Instruction" (entwickelnd-darstel- 
lender Unterricht) because of the mental activity this is 
supposed to awaken. As shown also in their scheme of 
"formal steps," the Herbartians are awake to the problem of 
method, and their opposition to the catechetical and memo- 



1 The example is borrowed from Professor Adams's book, Chapter V. of 
which is the best exposure of the "formal education" delusion in our 
language. 



22 The Critics of Herbartianism 

rising system is another indication that mere quantity has no 
attractions for them. Moreover, they are never weary of telling 
us that the only legitimate aim of education is the formation of 
a strong, moral Will, and that Instruction which fails to build 
up such a Will is not educative. Lastly, there is " concentration ". 
The conclusion arrived at is that Herbartianism may be a 
wholesome corrective to " didactic formalism," a doctrine 
which, though less prevalent than that of " didactic ma- 
terialism," is every whit as dangerous. There is surely vast 
truth in the watchword that "action springs out of the circle 
of thought ". Thus one great lesson Herbart has to tell us is 
that we cannot dispense with conferring Knowledge. Instruction 
is vitally important. However much stress we may rightly 
lay on " heuristic " methods and the awakening of mental 
activities, we cannot ignore the scientific giving of information. 
Man is not always in a pronouncedly conative state, aggressively 
striving towards a goal. Mentally as well as physically he 
must sometimes passively receive or assimilate. The advocates 
of "heuristic" and "gymnastic" methods forget this. Im- 
pressed as they are by the great mistake of former generations 
of teachers who regarded the minds of the young as so many 
tabulce rasce, or empty receptacles, the new apostles have swung 
to the opposite extreme and would fain make the young into 
perpetual motion machines. Such a procedure is grimly de- 
scribed by Dorpfeld : " die Schiiler lernen zwar vortrefflich 
kauen, aber sie haben nichts im Magen ". Which error is the 
more serious it is difficult to say. Mental life is rhythmic ; at 
one moment it may passively receive, at another it must actively 



Herbartianism corrects the error of "didactic formalism ". In 
the hands of unskilful teachers it might, perhaps, as already said, 
degenerate into a new kind of "didactic materialism," and 
indeed Hubatsch Y has boldly avowed that Herbartianism pre- 
fers easy subjects to difficult. Some educationists, on the other 
hand, will deny that there is any tendency in Herbartianism 

P See pp. 154 & 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 23 

towards ''didactic materialism". Was not the condemnatory 
phrase itself invented by an Herbartian ? Does not methodology 
owe much to the Herbartians? Do not the Herbartians lay 
enormous or exclusive stress upon character-forming ? Yes, but 
with them character-forming has to take place mainly through 
Instruction. Herbart had " no conception of Education without 
Instruction". This doctrine is, after all, the very essence of 
his teaching. If he was wrong here his system was wrong as 
a whole, despite possible excellences of detail. If ideas are not 
vitally important then Herbartianism is on the wrong tack. 

Connected with the fact of the high place given by Herbartians 
to Instruction is that of their deprecation of the policy of work- 
ing merely on the Feelings. Here again Ostermann finds fault 
with the reformers, though in reality the practical outcome of 
Herbartianism is precisely what Ostermann himself desiderates ; 
the Feelings are touched, but via ideas. What Herbart specially 
protested against was the direct " swaying of the feelings by 
which mothers especially so often believe they are educating 
their children ". Such a procedure, he contended, has little 
permanent result. The Feeling comes, and goes again ; the 
Character remains untouched. Aim at the circle of thought ; 
give ideas, so that, sooner or later, the apperceptive reverber- 
ations of these ideas may generate high Feeling — many-sided 
Interest. This is the message of the Herbartians. Here 
again, surely, they are right, sane, and suggestive. The 
utter powerlessness of certain great religious revivals per- 
manently to reform the human race is some testimony to the 
inadequacy of appeals to pure Feeling. The ebbing tide is with 
feeling, the flowing tide is with ideas. 

Many other things we owe to Herbart. There are the five 
steps of Instruction, called, by Ziller, the " formal steps ". The 
bitterest critics of Herbartianism do not deny that here we have 
a valuable contribution to educational method. True, we find 
the " steps " already suggested by Comenius, but the main 
glory of working them out is undoubtedly Herbart 's and Ziller's. 
Yet to this day, despite their admitted value, they are unknown 
in many British training colleges for teachers and misunderstood 



24 The Critics of Herbartianism 

by expositors. 1 For many a decade teachers have been asking 
how to draw up notes of lessons. The Herbartians can tell them. 

But there are dangers. The formal steps must not be applied 
unintelligently to all subjects. They must not always be em- 
ployed in the same order. Frequently one or more steps must 
be omitted. Still, the first thing necessary is to know them ; 
after that, the warnings of Karl Eichter 2 — who, by the bye, is 
one of the sanest of the critics of Herbartianism, and fully 
recognises the value of this part of the system — may well be 
attended to. 

Then there is the " concentration " 3 doctrine, mainly the 
work of Dorpfeld and Ziller, but distinctly foreshadowed in 
Herbart's plea for "large unbroken masses of thought". It 
is out of such masses, says Herbart, that moral action must 
spring. It is by building up such masses that the teacher 
will work effectively on the mind of his pupils. A curriculum 
consisting of isolated subjects is bound to be not only unwieldy 
(" didactic materialism " is a hard master), but also incapable of 
arousing Interest. The springs of Apperception are dried up. 

There are, it appears on examination, two elements in this 
" Concentration" doctrine. First there is the view that know- 
ledge should be a whole ; that hard and fast lines of distinction 
between one subject and another should be removed ; that one 
subject should throw light upon another. This doctrine may 
be called that of " unification ". Slowly it is working its way 
into British schools. The walls erected between history and 
geography, between arithmetic, algebra, and geometry are being 
broken down. Even writers who do not claim to be Herbartians 
are moving towards this standpoint. Dr. Armstrong urges us 
to " cease to be slaves to a rigid time-table, at least in the earlier 
years of school life," and rather, at each stage, " to do incidentally 
what is necessary " for the matter in hand. 4 Only in this way 

1 See p. 97. 2 See pp. 125 ff. 

3 The non-Herbartian reader must be warned that this does not exactly 
refer to " concentration of mind ". See what follows. 

4 Article on " Science in Education" in National Education (Murray), 
p. 119. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 25 

can real interest be aroused. When, in the course of a history- 
lesson, the name of a place is mentioned, the map must be 
immediately consulted. The history teacher must not say, 
"Geography is outside my province". The teaching of such 
subjects as these must be — let us admit the fact boldly — 
more diffuse and rambling. 

It is striking how from various unexpected quarters comes 
testimony to the need of this unification or concentration doc- 
trine. The recent famous report on the education of army 
officers declared that " military topography is treated too much 
as if it was a subject by itself, unconnected with tactics ". 
From writers on Sunday Schools comes advice that maps and 
geography should be more extensively made use of in teaching 
the Bible — very necessary advice and disgracefully belated. 1 We 
are, in truth, constantly drawing lines and erecting barriers where 
none should exist. Subjects like history, geography, languages, 
biblical literature, and so forth, are so mutually connected that, 
though each lesson may suitably bear a special name, it should 
yet make use of whatever pertinent information can be obtained 
from the other subjects. Thus, though the time-table need not 
perhaps be abolished, it should be obeyed in no slavish spirit ; 
and the person who draws it up should take care that the 
various related subjects fit into each other so far as possible. It 
is absurd to teach the geography of China alongside of the 
history of Alfred. 

But there is another element in the concentration doctrine 
which is of more dubious value. Ziller, as is well known, 
placed at the very centre of his curriculum " character-forming 
Instruction". Everything else had to be fastened on to this. 
Simple arithmetical exercises had to be set on a basis of 
Grimm's fairy tales and the life of Abraham. The history of 
the patriarchs had to be used for teaching the geography of the 
East. Possibly such a plan involved an unjust treatment of all 
subjects except the favoured one at the centre ; and even the 
supposed advantage of the plan — that all the thoughts of the 



1 See the writer's Student's Herbart for further information as to the 
progress of the "concentration" principle. 



26 The Critics of Herbartianism 

pupil would gather round and be connected with the " character- 
forming material" — was an illusory advantage. Fortunately, 
Ziller and most of his followers were early convinced, as a 
result of the criticisms directed against them, that their plan in 
the above crude form was unworkable. More "centres" than 
one were admitted to be necessary, and the claims of important 
subjects like science for a respectful treatment could not be 
resisted. Dorpfeld, a safer and saner guide than Ziller, placed 
three great knowledge-departments at the " centre," those which 
dealt with God, with man, and with nature ; to these three had 
to be subordinated or connected (1) the "formal" studies like 
mathematics and (2) the dexterities. The knowledge-depart- 
ments had, likewise, to support each other. 

As a residuum from the exaggerated "concentration" doctrine 
of Ziller we find left to us : (1) that all subjects which really 
and naturally throw light upon each other should be allowed to 
do so ; no artificial walls of separation between subjects should 
be permitted ; (2) that character-forming Instruction should 
have a place of great honour in the curriculum in virtue of its 
enormous importance ; (3) that possibly " formal " studies and 
dexterities should, as Dorpfeld and Dr. Findlay suggest, be made 
to follow the fortunes of the "knowledge-departments " rather 
than be pursued in isolation ; thus, at any rate, in primary schools. 

The various criticisms which have been directed against the 
usual form of the " concentration " doctrine will be found on a 
perusal of the argument of Bartels. 

Then there is the " culture stages doctrine " — faintly fore- 
shadowed by Herbart, and applied logically, though only in 
part successfully, by Ziller. Here again criticisms have been 
copious and severe. The doctrine in its abstract form is un- 
doubtedly based on a certain amount of truth, though Dr. 
Sallwiirk and others have raised some weighty objections. 
The child does perhaps tend to reproduce the history of the 
race, and educationists should, if possible, try to adapt their 
instruction to the different stages of child-development. 1 But 

1 Certain authors can only be appreciated by persons of a certain age. 
Boys of twelve love Marryatt and Ballantyne. Shakespeare's works do not 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 2 7 

no one will admit that Ziller's proposals are entirely satisfactory, 
though a few of them may represent an approximation to what 
is advisable. The " fairy-tale " proposal for the first school- 
year is easily justified. The child at this stage is scarcely 
yet a human being; its moral judgments are poor and fleeting. 
The moral life rests so largely on ideas, on imagination, on the 
circle of thought, that the best way to support this life in its 
earliest beginnings may be to feed the fancy rather than to 
stimulate artificially the nascent moral sense. Unfortunately 
many of the Zillerians have been unfaithful to this valuable 
part of their own doctrine, and have tried to use the fairy-tales 
for directly moral purposes, an attempt which critics have rightly 
ridiculed. 

Again, Ziller's startling proposal to postpone the life of Christ 
to the end of the school course, though violently attacked by 
Lutherans, is slowly coming to be recognised as justified. 
When we find American Doctors of Divinity declaring that 
" the child has to repeat a great many pre-Christian stages of 
evolution in its own life " because " Christianity came late in 
the history of the world " ; and when we find them saying 
that we must " bring the stress of teaching Christianity, from 
the New Testament, a little later than we put it," l are we not 
bound to admit that perhaps Ziller was, after all, no mere 
pedant, but a man with true scientific insight ? 

The Bobmson Crusoe proposal is of more doubtful value as 
a part of the culture-stages scheme, though the pedagogical 
capacities of the story are undoubted ; but the general plan upon 
which Ziller has worked out his scheme is valid — that, if the 
Bible be retained at all, the child must work through it in 
chronological order, 2 not dart in and out among the books, and 

appeal very much to the young, and it is doubtful whether, to any great 
extent, they should be employed in schools. No young person can appreciate 
Thackeray. Facts like these are inadequately recognised. 

1 See below, p. 71. 

2 This does not mean necessarily to follow the order of the books. See the 
writer's Reform of Moral and Biblical Education for a scheme essentially 
Zillerian at basis, 



28 The Critics of Herbartianism 

study simultaneously scraps from Samuel, Genesis, Isaiah, etc. 
The same remark also applies to the teaching of " secular 
history ". On this question our school- managers and teachers 
would profitably study Miss Dodd's book The Herbartian 
Principles of Teaching. 1 

Still, when all the merits and all the suggestiveness of the 
labours of Herbart and Ziller have been admitted, the critics 
remain undaunted. They insist that the underlying psychology 
is wrong. It is easy, for example, to ridicule the presentation- 
mechanism of Herbart. It is easy to cry aloud for a soul before 
whom presentations can appear ; to cry aloud for self-activity, for 
a creative principle. These demands can, possibly, be justified 
on metaphysical grounds. But for the educator the Herbartian 
conception is, far and away, the safer. Assuming that the 
creative, free-will, or self-activity principle is metaphysically 
justifiable, is it worth anything educationally ? Is it amenable 
to systematic guidance ? Examination will show that it has 
no existence apart from presentations, though it is probably 
not resolvable into these, as Herbart thinks. Now presen- 
tations are amenable to systematic control, and though they 
are not such well-nigh self-existent entities as Herbartianism 
represents them, they are, in a measure, capable of being 
treated as such. They have number, intensity, quality, and 
so forth : to some extent, moreover, they appear as mechanical 
forces in mutual interaction. For these and other reasons they 
are capable of a systematic treatment of which the self-activity 
principle, however essential to a complete view of mental life, 
is not capable. In fact the educator must, in. large measure, 
view his pupil as a presentation-mechanism and nothing else. 
The pupil may have a soul, and free-will, and transcendent 
faculties of all kinds, but it is certain that these faculties have 
neither existence nor significance apart from presentations. 
Whether Presentationalism has a future before it or not as 
psychology or philosophy — it has many supporters and their 
number is not, perhaps, decreasing — it will probably always 

1 Sonnenschein. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 29 



maintain its place as a valuable working-hypothesis for practical 
teachers. 

" But," it may be objected, " your presentations are no good 
unless they touch and rouse some innate tendencies in the 
pupil's soul. Apart from a latent or patent impulse, your 
presentations are, to use a homely illustration, ' so much water 
on the duck's back'." The writer was once discussing the 
Herbartian doctrine of Interest with a highly intelligent man, 
gifted, one would think, to an unusual degree with the power 
of rousing " interest ". " There is my son," he said, " without 
interest in anything. There is my daughter, keenly intelligent. 
Approximately they have received the same ' presentations '. 
Yet the one feels a keen interest in all speculative questions, 
the other feels none." An example like this reveals the weak- 
ness of Presentationalism as a completely interpretative system 
of philosophy, but does not subvert its enormous value for 
educational purposes. What answer is to be made to the 
objection just cited? Simply this, that innate faculties are 
beyond the reach of all educational systems — not merely of 
Herbartianism ; l but that, given these innate faculties in what- 
ever degree, Herbartianism draws them forth and exercises 
them as no other system does or can. 2 

This, then, is the answer to the group of objections which 
come, strangely enough, from two very opposed schools. The 
physiologist or the materialist, with his emphasis on brain- 
traces and heredity, pours contempt upon Herbart's presenta- 
tion-mechanism, and avows that it cannot explain the simplest 
cases of instinctive action. The idealist, with his emphasis on 
self-consciousness, self-activity, freedom, and so forth, claims 
that the presentation-mechanism cannot explain these essential 
facts. Each contention may be admitted. But the Herbartian 



1 " Doch ist kein Zweifel dass der Erzieher lieber seine Macht auf den 
Zogling iiber- als unterschatzen mochte." Rein, Pddagogik im Grund- 
riss, p. 76. 

2 Many, as we have seen, would deny this, and claim that Herbartianism 
is destructive of initiative. 



30 The Critics of Herbartianism 

may answer, " The teacher cannot manufacture heredity or make 
a clean sweep of brain-traces • he has no recipe for creating 
self-consciousness, no text-book for freedom of will. But he has 
the power of giving presentations, and this is his work." The 
other factors, as being incalculable or inevitable, he is bound, in 
some measure, to neglect. The gardener assumes that his seeds 
contain the vital principle — a principle beyond his power of pro- 
duction ; his work is to give soil and nourishment. He is not 
disturbed by the objection that all his efforts can neither create 
a seed nor cause one species to change into another. He answers 
that upon him rest the alternatives of life or of death for the 
seeds committed to his care. 

Educational schools which lay too much stress upon the inner 
principle inevitably relapse into vagueness. Frobel is no match 
for Herbart ; Natorp's criticism of Herbartianism may or may 
not be metaphysically sound, educationally it is, as a whole, 
worthless. Let us, if we choose, endow the Will with all kinds 
of mysterious potentialities instead of regarding it, with Herbart, 
as generated out of the movement of presentations. What 
then ? Is our educational system revolutionised a single whit ? 
Is the importance of presentations diminished ? Elugel's 1 
answer to Natorp seems here quite conclusive : " Man sehe den 
Willen als ein ursprungliches Strebevermogen an. Die Stellung 
der Padagogik bleibt vollkommen dieselbe. Der Wille sei ein 
allgemeines Strebevermogen ohne alle Vorstellungen. Als 
solches ist er zunachst schlafend, unwirksam, blinder Trieb oder 
wie man sich ausdriicken will, jedenfalls muss die schlummernde 
Kraft geweckt, ausgelost werden. Wodurch geschieht dies? 
Ohne jede Einwirkung wiirde sich kein Mensch zu einem 
denkenden, fuhlenden, wollenden Geschopf entwickeln. Es 
miissen also Einwirkungen von aussen kommen. Von seiten 
der Natur und der Menschen geht dieser Einfluss aus, und er 
besteht allgemein gesprochen in Vorstellungen." It matters 
not for educational purposes whether we regard the Will, apart 
from presentations, as sleeping or as non-existent. Ultimately, 

1 Zeitschrift filr Philosophie und Padagogik, 1899, p. 273. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 31 

no doubt, there is an important and fundamental difference 
between the two interpretations, but for the educationist the 
difference is practically negligible. In other words, Herbart's 
psychology may be incorrectly based, yet for the teacher it may 
be the best psychology in existence. Natorp x ridicules the notion 
that Herbart's educational system can be accepted as approxi- 
mately valid, while at the same time its supposed metaphysical 
and psychological foundations are to be rejected. Surely he 
might have remembered the case of astronomical science, many 
of the practical applications of which involve a use of the Ptole- 
maic terminology and conceptions as these are found more con- 
venient than the Copernican. 2 

But need one be so apologetic for the supposed foundations 
of Herbart's system ? Certainly it is no time to dogmatise in 
psychological matters, but Presentationalism — in the persons of 
Miinsterberg and others — is sufficiently alive to demand re- 
spectful attention. Many of the phenomena of hypnotism and 
mental disease, phenomena such as " fixed ideas," and so forth, 
immediately suggest Herbart's scheme. 3 No doubt Natorp 
would reply that in these very cases self-consciousness is at a 
minimum, and that such cases are, for that reason, not typical. 
He is right ; but until he has discovered the laws in accordance 
with which self-consciousness can be trained apart from presenta- 
tions, his observation is of little educational value. And, be it 
remembered, the Herbartian principles of education were, after 
all, never deduced from the doctrine of the presentation-mecha- 
nism. Critics who forget this merely tilt at windmills. 

A similar answer can be made to critics of another stamp. 
Just as Natorp entered the field as champion of the Will against 
Herbartian Presentationalism, so Ostermann has appeared 



1 Herbart, Pestalozzi und die heutigen Aufgaben der Erziehungslehre, 
p. 3. 

2 "Audi aus falschen Voraussetzungen lassen sich mitunter richtige 
Ergebnisse ableiten," admits one of Herbart's critics. Ostermann, Die 
luLuptsdchlichsten Irrtiimer der Herbartsclien Psychologie, p. 37. 

3 See the remarks of various modern psychologists on the " tendency of 
ideas to act themselves out," e.g., Stout, Manual, p. 468, 1st edition. 



32 The Critics of Herbartianism 

championing, as we have seen, the cause of Feeling. Feeling, 
he protests, cannot be resolved into presentations or into any 
combination or co-operation of presentations. However closely 
connected it may be with these latter, it has peculiar properties 
and hence demands peculiar treatment. " Wohl sind die Gefiihle 
mit den Vorstellungen eng verknupft, aber sie sind darum keine 
blossen Zustandsweisen derselben, sondern stehen neben ihnen 
als selbstandige geistige Vorgange und als ureigne Zustande der 
Seele selbst." 1 He therefore urges the importance of direct 
appeals to the feelings per se through the medium of stirring 
stories — a recommendation which, curiously enough, brings 
us close up to the proposals of the Herbartians ; witness 
the doctrine of Gesinnungs-unterricht. Here, as in so 
many other points, they have had a fine sense for what 
is genuinely important and educative. Their presentation- 
mechanism may be a fiction, but it has shown itself an inno- 
cent and useful one. A feeling may not be a presentation or 
purely the result of presentations, yet it is closely connected 
with them (as Ostermann admits in the above quotation), and 
hence the Herbartian emphasis on these latter does not in 
practice lead astray. It may not be true that " all influence 
on the feelings must take place through the circle of thought," 
but any error here involved is more than counterbalanced by 
the priceless element of truth. 

Herbart's ethics has been criticised even more severely than 
his psychology. There seems at first sight an artificiality 
appertaining to the " five moral ideas " as great as that which 
attaches to the presentation-mechanism. Why five ideas ? 
Is this unity ? Why accept the five blindly as immediate 
intuitions ? Why not find some common basis for them all ? 
These questions are pertinent, but the answer to them is that 
philosophers have for centuries been trying to unify ethics and 
have failed. One portion of the moral notions of man may be 
satisfactorily " reduced to lower terms/' but another invariably 



1 Die hauptsachlichsten Irrtumer der Herbartschen Psychologie und Hire 
Padagogischen Konseguenzen, p. 239. 



Introductio?i to the Critics of Herbartianism 33 

escapes such reduction. Individual Perfection is one moral 
end ; social Justice is another with equally urgent claims, and 
it passes the ingenuity of philosophers to base them upon a 
common ground. Intuitionism has vitality yet, and Herbart's 
ethics with its five moral ideas intuitionally apprehended is at 
the present moment as logically defensible as any other system. 
One of the most searching of English investigations into ethical 
problems has resulted in a return to a purified Intuitionism 
in which the ideas of Equity and Benevolence hold a prominent 
place, in which the notion (though not necessarily the fact) of 
Freedom is regarded as essential to the moral life, and in which 
the notion of Perfection cannot be got rid of except by a 
desperate effort. 1 Here are four ideas, superficially at least 
similar to four of Herbart's, yet arrived at in a way altogether 
different from his. 

We may probably say with considerable truth that when the 
student of education first dips into Herbartianism he is entranced 
with the thoroughness and logical connectedness of the system. 
Then comes a period of reaction and distrust ; he finds, as he 
thinks, that it commits him to fatalism, that personality vanishes, 
that a consistent Herbartian is cousin to a materialist. Then 
on deeper study he begins to see the astonishing — almost 
miraculous — adaptedness of this system for educational pur- 
poses and for social reform ; he begins to see that though its 
metaphysical basis may be false, and even its psychology de- 
ficient; in its neglect or misinterpretation of the consciousness- 
factor, yet those aspects in which the system is strong are 
precisely those which touch upon the work of the teacher. 2 The 
student can, if he choose, supply the supposed deficiencies of 
Herbartianism by adding correlative spiritual factors ; his mind 
will then be at rest, and he can, with a clear conscience, call 
himself a reformed Herbartian. But probably the best features 
of his work as educationist will spring out of the original Her- 

1 Sidgwick's Methods of Ethics. 

2 " Herbartianism has its weaknesses, yet it seems to me the best system 
for application to education." Professor Adams, Herbartian Psyclwlogy, 
p. 14. 

3 



34 The Critics of Herbartianism 

bartian contribution — the notion of the presentation-mechanism 
and of its intimate connection with volition. 

The primary design of the present work is not to give an 
exposition of Herbart's principles. The English reader has 
now ample opportunities for becoming acquainted with those 
principles, and if, in addition, he can read German, he will find 
Herbart's own works comparatively easy once he has acquired 
some familiarity with the leading thoughts and the technical 
expressions. There are, of course, later developments of Her- 
bartianism, and some of these are now available in an English 
form. 1 

If any one unacquainted with Herbartianism should take up 
this book with the desire of mastering the details of that system, 
he will thus, in some measure, be disappointed. The design of 
the work is to indicate the nature of the present-day educational 
controversies over Herbartianism, and in this way to pave the 
way to an impartial judgment upon the questions at stake. 

A word or two as to the " critics ". 

The sections on Wesendonck, Bartels, Hubatsch, and Chris- 
tinger deal largely with Ziller. On the other hand the attack 
of Dittes was directed exclusively against Herbart. Because of 
its importance it has been given in some fulness, and a con- 
siderable number of footnotes have been added in order to 
ensure that both sides of the question may be known. 

The Eichter section deals fully with the "formal steps"; 
Bergemann is suggestive on the " culture steps " ; while Linde 
deals well with the question of." developing presentative 
Instruction ". 

The attack of Hubatsch is often fresh and forcible, as when 
he accuses Herbartians of preferring easy subjects to hard. 
Natorp is treated somewhat fully, mainly because of the recency 
of the attack and because the Herbartians have officially replied 
to him at considerable length. But Natorp's treatise is mainly 
philosophical and does not deal with practical problems or, to 
any great extent, with Ziller. Ostermann's psychological criti- 

1 E.g., Kein's Outlines of Pedagogy. 



Introduction to the Critics of Herbartianism 35 

cism, owing to the nature of the case and to the condensation 
rendered necessary, will probably be found hard ; so also will 
Vogel's. Sallwiirk subjects the doctrine of "culture stages" 
to a thorough investigation ; Drews deals with Ziller's peculiar 
prejudice against questioning (in a few matters Ziller was 
distinctly a reactionary) ; while Kunz discusses Herbartianism 
from the standpoint of a Eoman Catholic. There are, by the 
bye, plenty of other "critics" awaiting exposition — if the task 
is worth anyone's performance. 

One really great name has been omitted from the list — 
that of Dorpfeld. But Dorpfeld himself was an Herbartian, 
and though he freely criticised some of Ziller's proposals it 
would be misleading to enrol him formally among the critics of 
Herbartianism. From one point of view he may be regarded 
as its greatest exponent. Moreover if Dorpfeld were dealt with 
at all he ought to be dealt with in great fulness. It is only be- 
cause, in most English expositions, Zillerianism is identified 
with Herbartianism, that there is any temptation whatever to 
deal with him as a " critic ". 



PART II. 

HISTOEICAL SUEVEY. 

1. Herbart (1776-1841). 

Herbart was a contemporary of Frobel (1783-1852), and a 
younger contemporary of Niemeyer (1754-1828), and Pestalozzi 
(1746-1827). 

The name of Pestalozzi is so well-known in Britain that there 
is little need to enter here into an account of the various weighty 
reforms of educational method for which we have to thank the 
great Swiss philanthropist. Still less need is there to go further 
back and trace the connection between Herbart and Eousseau 
via Pestalozzi. The connection has much historical interest ; 
but, pedagogically, Herbart's ideas are remote from those of 
Eousseau, and show such wide divergences even from those of 
Pestalozzi himself x that educationists are to some extent divided 
on the question whether Herbart was in any sense whatever 
faithful to the Pestalozzian tradition. The truth appears to be 
that the significance of Pestalozzi lies less in the concrete 
achievements of his life (though these were important and 
valuable) than in the stimulus and the idealism which he im- 
parted to other thinkers. Frobel and Herbart both came into 
contact with him (Frobel, 1807-9, Herbart, 1799), and upon 
both of them his Anschauung 2 doctrine had effect, giving 

1 For example, Pestalozzi's work was lamentably weak on the side of 
history, whereas history is all-important in the Herbartian system. 

2 It is useless to try to translate this word; accordingly it will be used, 
in the present work, as it stands. " Sense Experience," " Intuition," 
"Observation," are all sorry translations. 



Historical Survey 37 



rise to the Kindergarten system and to the "Apperception" 
doctrine. 

The name of Niemeyer is unknown in England, but the 
influence of this writer upon Herbart was apparently consider- 
able. It was his Principles of Education and Instruction l upon 
which Herbart, when professor at Konigsberg and Gottingen, 
based his pedagogical lectures, and to which frequent references 
are made in his works. 

It was an age of great names. Besides Frobel, Herbart had 
for contemporaries the idealistic thinkers Schelling and Hegel. 
As an older contemporary there was, as we have seen, Pesta- 
lozzi ; there were also Kant and Fichte. In England, Lancaster 
and Bell 2 were working ; Arnold was born in 1795 ; Jacotot in 
1770. " 

Herbart himself was born in 1776 at Oldenburg. He early 
showed signs of promise, and in 179-1 entered the University at 
Jena, a town destined to become in later years one of the three 
chief centres of the educational propaganda associated with his 
name. Here he came, via Eichte, under the influence of the 
then predominant Kantian philosophy ; we must probably trace 
to this source his emphasis upon the moral end of education, 
an emphasis which his followers have even increased. From 
1797 to 1799 Herbart was in Switzerland as private tutor to 
the three sons of Herr von Steiger, and the letters he despatched 
relative to the progress of these boys throw much light upon 
the growth of his ideas. In 1799 he met Pestalozzi at Burgdorf, 
and in the same year he was to be found at Bremen as student 
of philosophy. Three years later, having taken his doctor's 
degree, he began at Gottingen to lecture and write on Philosophy 
and Education. A little earlier he had written (1801) Ideas on 
a Pedagogical Plan of Teaching for Higher Classes, and now, 
located at Gottingen, he began seriously to devote himself to 
working out an educational system. In 1802 appeared certain 

1 Niemeyer was Chancellor of Halle University. In 1836 his book 
attained its ninth edition. 

2 To hear of Bell among " great " men sounds strange. But some nations 



have to be thankful for small mercies. 



38 The Critics of Herbartianism 

works whose titles suggest at once his interest in the life-task 
of Pestalozzi : Upon Pestalozzi's Newest Work ; How Gertrude 
Teaches her Children) and Pestalozzi's Idea of an A B C of 
Anschauung. In 1804 appeared his JEsthetic Bevelation of the 
World as the Chief Work of Education, and still another 
brochure dealing with Pestalozzi. Two years later he came 
before the world as author of an educational masterpiece, 
General Pedagogy, deduced from the Purpose of Education. 1 
Here he appeared as an independent thinker, and no longer in 
obvious relation to Pestalozzi. Works on logic, metaphysics, 
and moral philosophy also came from his pen. It is clear, from 
the foregoing sketch, that Herbart's interests were primarily 
educational and only secondarily philosophical. His educa- 
tional system was no deduction, as many people suppose, from 
a pre-arranged and artificial philosophical system ; his philo- 
sophical system was rather an artificial structure thrown around 
or placed beneath his educational system. He was not, like 
Kant, philosopher first and educationist afterwards ; education 
was his first and his last interest. He worked at psychology 
and philosophy partly (perhaps mainly) in order to gain a 
foundation for his pedagogical ideas. 

In 1809 his fame was such as to cause him to be summoned 
to the most distinguished philosophic chair in Germany, that 
which had been occupied only a few years before by Immanuel 
Kant. In 1810 Herbart ventured on the founding at Konigsberg 
of a College or Seminar for the training of teachers, an estab- 
lishment which, though not numerically strong, and though 
fated to come to an end when Herbart left for Gottingen, was 
full of significance for the future. 2 During the Konigsberg 
period Herbart published various works on philosophy, psy- 
chology, and metaphysics. In 1833 he went back to Gottingen 
and taught again with success and considerable fame. In 1835 
appeared his Outline of Pedagogical Lectures, in some respects 



1 Referred to as Science of Education by Mr. and Mrs. Felkin. 

2 As we shall see, Stoy and Ziller both founded " Seminars " on Herbart's 
plan. 



Historical Survey 39 



a more important work than the General Pedagogy because 
representing more mature views. In 1841 he died, and with 
him Herbartianism seemed, for the time, to have died also. 

For the remarkable feature about this system is that at 
Herbart's death it possessed but little authority and few ad- 
herents, whereas thirty or forty years later it had risen to a 
commanding position, and was claiming the allegiance of hun- 
dreds if not of thousands of German teachers. This resuscitation 
was the work mainly of three men, Stoy, Dorpfeld, and Ziller. 

But before an account of the labours of these giants can be 
thoroughly intelligible, the leading Herbartian doctrines must 
be known in outline, and in the form which they had taken 
at the death of Herbart. The term " Herbartianism " covers a 
wide field of thought, and we must distinguish the contributions 
of the founder from those of his followers. 

2. Outline of Herbart's Doctrines. 

(1) Most fundamental is Herbart's view that " Character " is 
the end of true Education. " Ethics gives the goal," and ethics, 
of course, is the science of Morality or Character. Whatever 
does not contribute to the moral life is not true Education. 

[Needless to say, this view has met with abundant opposition. 
Many teachers and writers claim that Education has several 
goals — Morality, Knowledge, Skill, etc. — and urge that these 
cannot be reduced to one. But the most characteristic feature 
of Herbartianism is the denial of any ultimate multiplicity.] 

(2) Character, then, is the end, goal, or purpose of Education. 
But how is the goal to be reached ? ' ' Ethics gives the goal, 
psychology gives the means." Hence teachers must know 
psychology or mental science. 

(3) But which psychology ? " Herbart's ; and the characteris- 
tics of this psychology are that the soul has no ' faculties ' 
in the ordinary sense, no semi-independent powers of Will, 
Feeling, Memory, etc. ; that it is quite empty but for ' presenta- 
tions ' or ideas ; that the whole life of the soul consists in the 
rise, fall, and mutual action of these units. Even Will is only 
a phase in the movement of presentations." 



40 The Critics of Herbartianism 

[But what about heredity? Here, perhaps, is the weakest 
side of Herbart's psychology. It cannot be said that he denies 
organic facts like heredity and variation ; he admits that the 
soul, on becoming united with a bodily organism, receives a 
special individuality, bent, or direction. But the tendency of 
Herbartianism, and indeed of most educational systems, is to 
minimise these facts. And such is natural. An educator cannot 
influence heredity ; he must take children as he finds them. 
Herbart's psychology was, in part at least, elaborated for peda- 
gogical purposes, and thus laid more stress upon environment 
and Education than upon such elements as heredity and varia- 
tion, which, unlike " presentations," are quite beyond the power 
of the teacher. 1 ] 

(4) Since, in accordance with (3), presentations are of supreme 
importance, and all action " springs out of the circle of thought " 
(i.e., out of presentations), the great task of the educator must 
be to form aright this thought-circle. This is the work of 
" Instruction ". 2 " Education," 3 which is [see (1)] the forming 
of a good Will or good Character, must rest mainly or entirely 4 
upon Instruction, the forming or culture 5 of the circle of thought. 

[This emphasis on Instruction is another characteristic of 
Herbartianism. Opponents have not been remiss in criticising 
this doctrine ; but it has great pedagogical importance.] 

(5) Though " the one and the whole work of Education may 
be summed up in the concept ' Morality/ " yet there is another 
concept of almost equally fundamental importance, that of 
" balanced, many-sided Interest ". If the pupil has attained 
to this, ipso facto he has advanced a long way towards Virtue 
or Morality. Many-sided Interest is of enormous moral value, 
guiding the life, keeping from evil, building Character. " If 
intellectual interests are wanting, if the store of thought be 

1 Of. Locke, Thoughts Concerning Education, § 1. "Of all the men we 
meet with, nine parts of ten are what they are, good or evil, useful or not, by 
their Education." 

2 Unterricht. 3 Erziehung. 

4 These alternatives stand for one of the ambiguities of Herbartianism. 

5 Bildung. 



Historical Survey 41 



meagre, the ground lies empty for the animal desires. . . . 
Stupid people cannot be virtuous." Thus it matters com- 
paratively little which of the two goals (Morality or Interest) 
we regard as the teacher's. Interest may be classified as 
empirical, speculative, aesthetic, sympathetic, social, and re- 
ligious. 

[Here again opponents, especially Catholics and strong 
Lutherans, have objected. They have claimed that between 
" Virtue " and " many-sided Interest " there is not necessarily 
any close connection. But the doctrine is characteristic of 
Herbartianism.] 

(6) This " many-sided Interest," which is of such supreme 
educational importance, depends upon the relation of new 
presentations to old. An absolutely unfamiliar object or event 
has no "Interest" for us ; hence the teacher's task must be 
so to arrange his teaching-material that all new matter may 
be brought into relation to the previous acquisitions of the 
child. The new must be " apperceived " (grasped, interpreted, 
assimilated) by the old. Apperception is the process by which 
individual ideas are brought into relation to our previous ex- 
perience, are assimilated with it, receive meaning from it, and 
are thus raised to a position of significance. 

[Herbart here amplifies the Anschauung doctrine of Pestalozzi 
by showing that new things must not only be presented in con- 
crete forms, but also be seized hold of by the previous knowledge 
of the pupil. One probable result of this doctrine is the eleva- 
tion of those subjects that confer ideas to a chief place in the 
curriculum ; for Apperception, and therefore Interest, depend 
on ideas.] 

(7) In working out this doctrine of Interest and Apperception 
Herbart arrived at his doctrine of the "formal steps" of 
Instruction. This doctrine solves, in large measure, the vexed 
question, " How to draw up notes of lessons ". The steps are, 
according to Herbart, 1 (a) Clearness (the analysis of previous 



1 Later Herbartians have greatly improved Herbart's terminology, and 
have divided his first step into two. But they have not essentially altered 
his doctrine. 



42 The Critics of Herbariianisnt 

notions and the addition of the new matter) ; (b) Association ; 
(c) System ; (d) Method. At the second stage x (Association) 
similar phenomena are brought together, compared, and con- 
trasted ; at the third, generalised notions are attained ; at the 
last practical applications are made. 

[The "formal steps" admittedly constitute one of the most 
valuable portions of Herbartian pedagogical doctrine.] 

(8) Though "Instruction" is the main work of Education 
(inasmuch as " action springs out of the circle of thought "), yet 
Herbart admits (inconsistently?) the necessity for two other 
tasks. These are " Government "or " Discipline," and " Train- 
ing ". 2 The former aims at the preservation of external order in 
the school; though it is a necessity, it is devoid of direct 
character-forming significance and Herbart therefore hesitates 
to include it under Education proper. "Training" includes 
various processes (e.g., certain punishments) which cannot be 
regarded as falling under " Instruction" and which are yet of 
some importance for Character. 

The tasks of the teacher are thus Instruction, Training, and 
Discipline. 

(9) A word must be said with regard to Herbart's ethical 
doctrines which were of an intuitional nature. There are, he 
held, five moral notions which we intuitionally recognise as 
worthy of approval. These are Inner Freedom, Perfection, 3 
Benevolence, Eight (or Justice), and Equity (or Eairness). The 
first of these is almost the same as Conscientiousness, the har- 
mony of one's Will with one's Moral Insight. The second is of 
special significance to the educator, inasmuch as it is closely 
related to the doctrine of " balanced, many-sided Interest ". The 

1 Third stage with Ziller. 

2 Mr. and Mrs. Felkin translate Begierung as " Government" and Zucht 
as "Discipline". But Begierung really stands for what most English 
teachers would call " Discipline," while Zucht may be very roughly trans- 
lated "moral Training" or "Training". In this book Van Liew will be 
followed ; he constantly represents Begierung by " Discipline " and Zucht 
by " Training ". 

3 Not "perfection" in the usual vague idealistic sense. It represents 
efficiency and breadth of Will. 



siistorical Survey 43 



11 second idea " really puts in a claim for culture, breadth of out- 
look, strength of mind, etc., as "moral" qualities. The re- 
maining three ideas are somewhat, though by no means exactly, 
congruent with popular notions. The five ideas are independent 
of each other and cannot be further reduced or simplified. On 
no account, says Herbart, are we to try to represent morality as 
a calculation of consequences such as pleasure or pain. 

3. The Revival of Herbartianism. — Volkmar Stoy (1815-85). 

Though Herbart's educational labours had not passed without 
recognition during his lifetime, there seemed no likelihood, in 
the year of his death (1841), that his system would ever attain a 
commanding position. True, his general philosophy had won 
the approval of a circle of thinkers whose aversion to Hegel had 
predisposed them to a " realistic " system. Among the philo- 
sophical followers of Herbart were Drobisch, Strumpell, 
Lazarus, Steinthal, Nahlowsky, Waitz, Volkmann, and Cor- 
nelius, from whom have come various weighty contributions to 
philosophy, more especially to the psychology of language and 
of the feelings. But Herbart's pedagogical efforts seemed to 
have borne but little fruit. Mager, in the pages of the Pdda- 
gogische Revue, and in an important work on the teaching of 
languages, was one of the few who, during the decade which 
followed 1841, kept alive the memory of the master's educational 
labours. But Mager laid down his pen at forty. Waitz, too, 
who had contributed substantially to educational theory, and 
had, among other things, anticipated Ziller's approval of "fairy 
tales," died comparatively young. Herbart's General Pedagogy 
remained a first-edition book. 

Why this neglect? Partly, perhaps, because Herbart's edu- 
cational system belonged, or seemed to belong, to a great philo- 
sophical scheme, and at that time there was less desire for such 
a system than for plain, matter-of-fact, unphilosophical advice, 
for " common sense in Education ". Previous to the Napoleonic 
wars Education in Germany had been making great strides ; but 
it was seriously affected by the reaction which followed. ' ' Ee- 
ligious Instruction " monopolised, in some parts of Germany 



44 The Critics of i±. 



the largest space in the curriculum, and interest in educational 
principles per se seems to have nagged to a considerable extent. 
Not wholly, for the German mind even in its most unphilo- 
sophical periods cannot brook an entire separation from its 
favourite pursuits, and thus a barren empiricism, such as we in 
Britain love and pride ourselves upon, was never quite possible 
in Germany. But there is clear evidence that the days of the 
Holy Alliance, of Louis Philippe, and of '48 were not days of 
energetic educational thought. 

Moreover we must remember that Herbart's somewhat tech- 
nical terminology may have been a drawback to the popularity 
of his system. 

But the revival of Herbartianism came at length, and had its 
seat at Jena. 

Karl Volkmar Stoy was born at Pegau in Saxony, 1815. 
After studying at Leipzig and Gottingen, he became, in 1839, a 
teacher at Weinheim, and four years later was made "privat- 
docent " in philosophy and pedagogy at Jena. In this Univer- 
sity he delivered, for many years, the lectures on Education 
which ultimately made his name, and that of his master Her- 
bart, famous throughout Europe. Students visited Jena from 
all parts of the world, even America sending its contingent. 

But Stoy saw that, in order to effect permanent results, some 
facilities for practical teaching would have to be offered to the 
students of Education who had gathered around him. Accord- 
ingly a pedagogical society, at first consisting of eleven members, 
was formed, and this ultimately grew into a "Seminar" with 
school attached. Here lessons were given, criticisms proffered, 
and conferences held. 

Stoy was more than an educationist ; he was a warm-hearted 
philanthropist as well. His sympathies for the indigent of 
Jena were so keen that, partly out of his own resources, he 
founded and equipped a schoolhouse for poor children. Fruit 
culture, gardening, etc., were undertaken ; excursions organised ; 
gratuitous instruction given. Stoy was a " second Pestalozzi ". 

But, like Pestalozzi, he was not to live without being the 
object of criticism. Although in 1845 he had become Professor 



Historical Survey 45 



at Jena, and in 1857 had received the honourable title of 
"Schulrath" in recognition of his many services, yet in 1866 
he felt called upon to remove to Heidelberg, annoyed at certain 
attacks which had been made upon his Seminar. This latter 
institution, like that which Herbart had founded at Konigsberg, 
fell to pieces when the master's hand was withdrawn. But in 
1874 he was recalled to his old sphere of labour, and his return 
was the signal for a certain revival in the success of his Seminar. 
During the closing years of his life he came to be recognised 
more definitely than ever as one of the leading exponents of 
educational Herbartianism. He died in 1885. 

He and his followers had taken up a position of friendly but 
not slavish adherence to Herbart's doctrines. They often 
objected to their master's somewhat obscure and technical 
terminology. The "Interest" doctrine — worked out by the 
Zillerians l into a veritable gospel — occupied a more modest 
place in the programme of the Stoy-Herbartians, and appeared 
in the form of a doctrine of " elaboration of the thought circle," 
quite Herbartian in its way, but not daringly ambitious or 
propagandist. Even the " formal steps " doctrine was freely 
criticised ; not because the followers of Stoy denied its value, 
but because they feared it would become a fetish, and check all 
freedom and spontaneity in lesson-giving. 2 They laid much 
stress upon the personality of the teacher, and also upon so 
treating or " concentrating " the material of Instruction that 
related elements might be brought together, and thus time 
and power be saved by making use of psychological laws of 
" similarity," etc. But Stoy and his followers rejected the 
"concentration" 3 doctrine in Ziller's form, and likewise the 
fabric of Gesinnungs-unterricht, 4 historical " culture-stages," 
and so forth. " The notion of ' concentration,' " Stoy said, " has 

1 See p. 56. 

2 A fear justified by the action of many young and enthusiastic Her- 
bartians. 

3 See below, p. 54. 

4 " Character-forming Instruction" — a technical Zillerian term. See 
note, p. 53. 



46 The Critics of Herbartianism 

been taken possession of by the forces of superficiality." "What 
is new in Ziller's proposals is not good, and what is good 
is not new." 

4. The Revival of Herbartianism — Friedrich Wilhelm 
Dorpfeld (1824-93). 

Dorpfeld was born at Wermelskirchen, Ehenish Prussia, in 
1824. After an education in the schools of the locality he 
occupied several successive posts as teacher previous to entering 
on the main work of his life. It was in 1848 that, though still 
young, he was appointed, at the initiative of others, to the office 
of Principal or Eector of the Lutheran schools in Barmen 
(Ehenish Prussia). Other more lucrative posts he might have 
sought, but he never did so. His conviction of the true dignity 
and future independence of the educational profession was un- 
usually intense. Though he was quite aware that the rewards 
it proffered were mainly subjective, we find him expressing his 
conviction of this dignity in a letter to his betrothed (a clergy- 
man's daughter), who had not hesitated to suggest that there 
were better things in the world than schoolmastering. 

Dorpfeld occupied his post for thirty-two years with success 
and ever-increasing influence. The educational works which 
came from his pen were extremely numerous and obtained a 
wide circulation. 1 In 1872 the Minister of Education (Falk), 
interested in Dorpfeld's efforts to bring about a unity in school 
work, officially invited him to put his views before an in- 
fluential educational conference. "Concentration" was then, 
thanks to Ziller and Dorpfeld, "in the air". The compliment 
paid to Dorpfeld — an elementary schoolmaster — was, as he 
recognised, no small one : " Ein Schulmeister im Salon des 
Ministerhotels — das war in Preussen ein fast erschreckendes 
Novum ! " 

1 They are now published in ten volumes (Bertelsman, Giitersloh). The 
most famous are : Thought and Memory (five editions), Outlines of a Theory 
of a Teaching-Plan (two), Didactic Materialism (three), Two Pressing 
Reforms (three). Dorpfeld's literary activity has given rise to several 
thousand printed pages. 



Historical Survey 47 



In 1880 ill-health caused Dorpfeld to give up his work at 
Barmen. He retired on his pension, and died in 1893. 

He was a religious man, yet, like most Herbartians, he often 
took up an independent position relative to matters of Church 
and theology. He objected to the school being placed under 
the direct control and inspection of ministers of religion. To- 
wards the end of his life, grieved at the alienation of the 
cultured classes from Christianity, he sought to discover an 
ethical common- ground on which all good men could stand, 
one that was independent of theological opinions. 

As an Herbartian — though a critical and by no means bigoted 
one — he urged the need of "concentration," but interpreted this 
in a somewhat different sense from Ziller. Indeed, he freely 
criticised Ziller's proposals, though he recognised the brilliance 
and suggestiveness of his contemporary's work. Like Ziller, he 
urged that the elementary school (people's school, Volksschule) 
should not confine its operations to the "3 E's ". Two of the 
" 3 E's " (Beading and Writing) are, per se, mere dexterities, and 
do not contribute directly to the knowledge and character of the 
pupils, while the third (Arithmetic) is a "formal" study and 
therefore, though highly necessary, is also deficient on the same 
ground. Apperception and many-sided Interest never get a fair 
chance in such schools. The most important of all subjects 
were, on Dorpfeld's view, those which add to the mental and 
moral riches of the soul; subjects dealing with nature, man, 
and God. In quite the second rank come dexterities and formal 
studies. 

His greatest service was probably his insistence on the need 
of a Lehrplan, a definitely thought-out scheme of studies in 
which every subject should have an organic place. He had no 
sympathy or patience with a loose aggregate of studies such as 
is indicated on the average British Time Table. In his own 
way he was as eager for "concentration" or unification as 
Ziller himself. Not only should the whole curriculum be uni- 
fied, each department should undergo the same process. Bible 
and catechism, for example, should fit into each other and 
constitute a unity, the movement of thought being from biblical 



48 The Critics of Herbartianism 

stories to catechism, i.e., from concrete to abstract. Character- 
formation being the supreme aim of Education, " Religious 
Instruction," though not of a narrow dogmatic type, should 
have a central place in the curriculum, or rather should occupy 
the central place in company with the two other knowledge- 
departments above mentioned. 

With respect to the other Zillerian doctrine, that of " culture 
stages," Dorpfeld occupied a position of friendly criticism. He 
saw that to limit, as Ziller suggested, each year's course to 
a definite historical circle would bring about a vivid and deep 
comprehension of the material; and the understanding of the 
child would broaden out securely and steadily as the historical 
matter advanced from step to step. But, on the other hand, 
the Zillerian plan left little or no room for recapitulation, and 
the material of the earlier stages would be easily forgotten when 
the later stages were being studied. Moreover, these earlier 
stages were less morally rich than the later ones. Some schools, 
again, did not possess eight classes. Dorpfeld therefore sug- 
gested a combination of the " culture- stages " method with the 
rival plan of " concentric circles," and strongly objected to the 
Zillerian exclusion of the New Testament from the lower classes. 
He criticised likewise the strange preference Ziller sometimes 
showed for the employment, in class, of a book rather than the 
living voice of the teacher, and while not wholly condemning 
the proposal to substitute fairy tales for Bible stories in the early 
years, he questioned the advisability of proposing so violent a 
change when other less contentious reforms were pressing for 
attention. 

We have seen that he protested against the elevation of purely 
" formal " instruction 1 to the educational throne. He protested 
equally against "didactic materialism," the doctrine which only 
regards the quantity of subjects or of matter learnt, and ignores 

1 The view according to which the main function of Education must be 
to encourage certain habits of exactness, initiative, and so forth, even 
though little knowledge may be acquired. The extreme advocates of the 
"classics," and the extreme advocates of " heuristic methods," are, as we 
have seen, believers in " formal Education". 



Historical Survey 49 



the mode of learning and the connection of subjects. In Den- 
lien und Geddchtnis Dorpfeld has given to the world what is, 
with perhaps one exception, the best exposition of the appercep- 
tion process. He did much, also, to clarify the doctrine of the 
" formal steps ", 

The history of Education presents few men who have had so 
clear a view of the opposite dangers which beset the path of the 
teacher. 

5. The Revival of Herbartianism — Tuiskon Ziller (1817-82). 

Tuiskon Ziller was born at Wasungen (Thuringia) in 1817. 
After a careful education at the hands of his father, a Protestant 
clergyman, he proceeded to the gymnasium (grammar-school) 
at Meiningen, and subsequently to the University of Leipzig. 
At the latter he studied philology, and also became acquainted 
with the philosophy of Herbart through Hartenstein and 
Drobisch. ' But he was no narrow specialist ; almost every 
available object of study attracted, to a certain extent, his 
versatile mind. But the death of his father occurred and this 
made Tuiskon the chief support of the family. Accordingly he 
became a teacher in the gymnasium at Meiningen and laboured 
at this work for five years — apparently with success, his moral 
earnestness and energy winning for him the high esteem of his 
pupils. The fact that Ziller was no mere theorist unacquainted 
with scholastic practice deserves to be kept in mind. 

Returning to Leipzig, he took up juristic studies, and after a 
brief period of political activity became a " privat-docent " in 
Jurisprudence (1853). But his interest began to turn more and 
more to the working out of the Herbartian principles of Educa- 
tion. In 1863 he became a subordinate Professor, and his 
inaugural address bore witness to the nature of the task upon 
which he had now embarked. Its title was " The Present-day 
Efforts for Educational Reform according to Herbartian Prin- 
ciples." 

But it was in 1856 that he published his first important peda- 
gogical work, Introduction to General Pedagogy, which, how- 
ever, was far eclipsed in power and popularity by the epoch- 

4 



50 The Critics of Herbartianism 

making work of 550 pages, Foundation of a System of 
Educative Instruction 1 (1864), a work of which Dorpfeld 
boldly says that in originality, penetration, and richness of 
thought it is without a rival in pedagogical literature. 2 In 1857 
he had published The Discipline of Children, while in 1876 
followed his Lectures on General Pedagogy. This work has 
reached a third edition. 

"Educative Instruction." The phrase conveys no meaning 
to English minds. But a reference to section 2 will make 
things clear. If the goal of Education be, as Herbart contends, 
Morality or Character, and if the chief means to this end is 
Instruction, then any Instruction which conduces to Character 
is " educative," and any Instruction which does not conduce to 
Character is non- educative. "Educative Instruction" 3 is In- 
struction which, by way of many-sided Interest, makes for 
Character. Here we have the keynote to Ziller's work and the 
source of the Herbartian zeal. 

Like Herbart and like Stoy, Ziller had no intention of con- 
fining his pedagogical labours to lectures and authorship. A 
"Seminar" with practising-school was brought into existence 
(1862). But difficulties were many. The University gave no 
support to the project of training teachers, for teaching, in 
Germany as in England, had always been a sort of "poor rela- 
tion " among the professions. The State was equally backward 
in encouraging the reformer. But Ziller was a man of un- 
bounded energy, egotism, and self-confidence ; aided by two 
citizens of Leipzig he succeeded at last in his worthy project. 
Criticism lessons were given ; conferences were held ; enthusiasm 
grew. Clearly this man had a magnetic personality, otherwise 
he could never have generated out of the materials at his dis- 
posal the life and energy which were soon to manifest them- 
selves in extreme forms. The institution itself consisted of two 
or three moderate-sized rooms on the ground-floor, a limited 

1 Orundlegung zur Lehre vom Erziehenden Unterricht. (2nd edition, 
1884.) 

2 Der didaktische Materialismus, p. 3. d Erziehender Unterricht. 



Historical Survey 51 

playground, a modest garden and — a cellar for the use of 
teachers ! The gloomy steps leading down to the last-mentioned 
were jestingly compared by new-comers with the " formal steps " 
of Instruction, whose obscurity was supposed to rival that of 
the more material escalier. Ziller's chief supporter was Dr. 
Barth, formerly head teacher in Stoy's Seminar at Jena. 

It was amid such unpromising surroundings that Her- 
bartianism experienced its second birth. The extraordinary 
personality of Ziller was responsible for the powerful movement 
which arose. His moral Idealism and unconquerable enthusi- 
asm drew to him many of the best students at Leipsig. He 
was an optimist and a prophet. He had no doubts. Education 
was to regenerate the world. He was a fervid Christian, yet 
no bigot. By the more narrow-minded among the Lutherans 
he was dubbed " rationalist" because he would not admit that 
the Bible gave the key to every science and because he refused 
to approve of it as suitable food for babes. "Free-thinkers," 
on the other hand, despite the existence in Ziller's system of a 
soupqon of Darwinism, despised him asa" pietist ". 

More momentous in some respects than any of Ziller's other 
achievements was his founding of the " Union for Scientific 
Pedagogy" 1 (1868). The publications of this society and the 
annual reports of its proceedings introduced Zillerianism to a 
wide circle of readers. But the chief significance of the matter 
lay in the name of the society. The claim of the Zillerians to 
be "scientific" teachers was pregnant with results. Those 
who refused to acknowledge the supremacy of the new Leipzig 
gospel protested vigorously, often bitterly, against the claim. 
But Ziller's party have stuck to the name. Nay, not content 
with thus implicitly reflecting upon the methods of non- 
Zillerians, they have gone so far as to dub their critics "vulgar 
pedagogues," 2 "mere practitioners," "mercenaries," "people 

1 Verein fie?- wissenschaftliche Pddagogik. Stoy and his adherents be- 
longed to it, but many of them gradually seceded. 

2 Dr. Wesendonck (Die Schule Herbart-Ziller und ihre Jilnger) believes 
that this dyslogistic phrase originated among the Stoy section of Her- 
bartians. 



5 2 The Critics of fferbartiatiism 



whose mental horizon ends with their noses," " ignoramuses," 
and "literary nullities " to whom " Pedagogy is an El Dorado 
of Dilettantism ! " 

The truth is that most reforming movements, especially such 
as are inspired by a warm and worthy enthusiasm, easily come 
to manifest signs of arrogance and bigotry. The Zillerians felt 
themselves called to save Germany by the preaching of a new 
educational gospel. They felt that their motives were good ; 
they believed that their methods were philosophical and scien- 
tific. Around them they saw apathy and empiricism. They 
criticised ; their criticisms were thrown back upon them ; they 
retorted; the tone of both parties became more and more 
bitter ; the reformers were not unjustly dubbed " bigots " and 
" fanatics " ; they retorted upon their critics the perhaps equally 
just charges of apathy, ignorance, and narrow professionalism. 
And thus the controversy has gone on to the present day. 

Herbartianism, with all its faults, is a system, apparently the 
only educational system in existence which has at the same 
time a definite psychology, a vast and fairly coherent mass 
of literature, a considerable number of journals devoted to 
its cause, a series of great names — above all, the power of rous- 
ing enthusiasm ! It has a clearly defined aim : it knows its 
mind : it is in earnest. Unfortunately its arrogance has been 
almost unbounded, and has alienated thousands of teachers 
who, had they not been scolded, might have become supporters. 
But the story of the controversy between the " scientific " and 
the " vulgar" pedagogues will be told in a following section 
and need not here be anticipated. Let us return to Ziller. 

His Union soon numbered five hundred members, and its 
influence extended into Austria and Switzerland. 1 Ziller's 
success, be it noted, was not the result of his own eloquence 
or of any extraneous assistance. He had even to struggle 
for the correct oral utterance of his thoughts ; he was deaf. 
His Seminar was — what we have seen ! Clearly, then, the 

1 Where an Herbartian journal was established — Swiss Pages for 
Educative Instruction. 



Historical Survey 53 



influence of this man was due either to the force of his ideas 
or to the force of his personality, or to both. A Zillerian, 
wherever he goes and whatever his faults, is always an en- 
thusiast. 

In 1881 the Leipzig Seminar celebrated its twentieth birth- 
day. From various parts of Germany came past students 
anxious to show their esteem for the institute and its chief. 
But soon after this an apoplectic stroke reduced that chief to 
comparative inactivity. He struggled on with the production 
of the current Year-book of his Union, and died at his task 
(1882). 

6. Outline of Ziller s Doctrines. 

Even more emphatically than Herbart, Ziller held to the 
view that the true end of Education is moral. He went so 
far as to define it as the establishment of the "Kingdom of 
God on earth," conceived, of course, after the manner of a 
cultured Protestant Lutheran. 

Herbart's psychology was, as we have seen, a presentational 
psychology. "Action springs out of the circle of thought"; 
hence the main work of the educator is the formation of this 
" circle of thought ". But every circle has a centre, and if the 
pupil's " circle of thought " is to be orderly and truly effectual 
in the production of virtue, its centre must be especially rich in 
" educative " material. Here we come upon a characteristic 
Zillerian doctrine ; at the very centre of all Instruction must 
lie " Gesinnungs-unterricht," l character- building Instruction. 

But what kind of Instruction is specially " Character-build- 
ing " ? Instruction of an historical, biographical, or narrative 
kind, including " sacred " history, and, for very young children, 
fairy tales and sagas. Ziller' s emphasis on the character-form- 
ing function of such material is to some, though not a great 

1 There is no possibility of an exact English translation of this phrase. It 
is a technical phrase, peculiar to Herbartianism. Its meaning will become 
clearer as we proceed. Perhaps " humanities," as Dr. Findlay suggests, may 
be the best translation. 



54 The Critics of Herbartianism 

extent in agreement with the old " humanistic " doctrine. This 
material, then, must be the very centre of our curriculum. 

But our Instruction must form a unity if Apperception is 
to take place and Interest to be created. It will never do 
to allow our Gesinnungs-unterricht to be separated by hard and 
fast lines from other subjects. We must unite all our in- 
struction together by means of innumerable connections, and 
especially unite it to the central matter. In this way the 
pupil's " circle of thought " will become a real unity, and hence 
action also will become regular and precise. On the other 
hand, if the child has various " circles of thought " his 
character must necessarily be devoid of stability. 

[This "concentration" doctrine is Zillerian; it cannot be 
found in Herbart, though possibly it can be deduced from his 
doctrine that large, unbroken masses of thought are necessary 
for moral action. The reader must note the significance of the 
result thus attained. Certain subjects (e.g., Mathematics) will 
cease to be cultivated in the school as independent departments 
of activity ; they will have to be attached to the central matter 
and be dominated by this. Ziller's critics strongly objected to 
such a proposal, and succeeding Zillerian s have gradually 
abandoned or modified it. Herbart certainly never contem- 
plated a positive degradation of Mathematics. On the other 
hand, Mathematics undoubtedly gains in interest, during the early 
stages, by being kept in close connection with the concrete.] 

Another characteristic Zillerian doctrine is that of " histori- 
cal culture stages," supposed to be in part a scientific 
corollary from Herbart's " apperception " teaching. Matter 
has to be presented to the child of such quality and amount 
as to be readily assimilated or "apperceived ". Hence 
what is to be presented to the child of six must be very 
different from what is presented to the child of twelve. The 
child goes through definite stages of development and these 
stages, according to Goethe and others, 1 are identical, in 

1 E.g., Modern biologists par excellence. Spencer says, here agreeing in 
principle with Ziller ; " The education of the child must accord both in 



Historical Survey 55 



epitome, with the stages through which the race has gone 
historically. The two lines of development run parallel. Hence 
if we are to expect easy and ready " apperception " on the part 
of our pupils, we must reproduce, in our school instruction, the 
stages of race development. The teacher must present to very 
young pupils matter similar to that which primitive man under- 
stood ; with older pupils matter corresponding to later stages of 
civilisation ; and so on. 

[This sweeping doctrine — in essence perhaps more Frobelian 
than Herbartian — is, no doubt, " scientific " in conception, 
though the precise proposals of Ziller have awakened fierce 
criticism.] 

Coming to details of the material recommended by Ziller for 
Gesinnungs-unterricht, we find the following : — 

1st school year, 12 of Grimm's Marchen (Fairy tales). 
2nd ,, Robinson Crusoe. 



Together with " secular " 
history selected in a 
similar manner. 



3rd ,, The Patriarchs. 

4th ,, The Judges. 

5th „ The Kings. 

6th „ The Life of Jesus. 

7th ,, The Apostles. 

8th ,, The Reformation. 

This selection is regarded by Ziller as corresponding to eight 
stages of racial development, and therefore as also suitable for 
the instruction of children at eight different periods. The 
above material has to form the very centre of the school curri- 
culum. The fairy tales represent the youth of the world ; Eobin- 
son Crusoe represents primitive man learning the use of tools ; 
the patriarchs represent the nomadic stage, and so forth. 

[There is here ample ground for criticism. Is the matter suit- 
ably selected ? Is it right, say Protestants, to exclude the Bible 
from stages (1) and (2), and to give only one year (6) to the 
life of Jesus ? Catholics will object to stage (8) and " secu- 
larists " to any use of the Bible.] 

mode and arrangement with the education of mankind considered his- 
torically. In other words, the genesis of knowledge in the individual 
must follow the same course as the genesis of knowledge in the race." 
— Education, p. 67. 



56 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Ziller and his followers enthusiastically accepted Herbart's 
scheme of " formal steps " and improved on it. 

Ziller also accepted the ''Interest" doctrine and elaborated 
it greatly, showing 1 how Interest is a "protection against 
passions," "an aid to one's earthly activity," and a "salvation 
amid the storms of fate ". In fact, Interest is an important 
stepping-stone to, or ingredient in, Virtue. 

7. Reaction and Controversy. 2 

We now approach the most critical period in the history of 
Herbartianism, the years 1884-6. 

For a time all had gone well. Stoy at Jena, and, still more, 
Ziller at Leipzig had won for Herbartianism or neo-Herbar- 
tianism a position of influence. In the Ehine provinces Dorp- 
feld as an independent- minded Herbartian and a practical 
educationist of no mean ability, had exerted an influence scarcely, 
if at all, less than that of the two professors further east. Ad- 
herents of Herbartianism were reckoned by hundreds and pro- 
bably numbered thousands. Though distinctively Protestant 
in inception, the new creed obtained some adherents among 
Catholics ; Vogt, the successor of Ziller in the Presidency of 
the " Union for Scientific Pedagogy," was a Catholic, and Will- 
mann, a Professor at Prague, also belonged and belongs to the 
older church. Though Germany was the headquarters of the 
system, almost every country of Europe (and some outside of 
Europe) had its contingent of Herbartian students. In the work 
entitled Herbart and the Herbartians (published by Beyer and 
Sonne, Langensalza) over a hundred quarto pages, containing no- 
thing but a list of Herbartian literature, German, French, Italian, 
Roumanian, English (or rather mainly American), Bohemian, 
Dutch, Armenian, Danish, Swiss, Croatian, and Hungarian, bear 

1 In an exposition extending over two hundred pages of his Grundlegung 
zur Lehre vom erziehenden Unterricht. 

2 It was during the controversies mentioned in this section that Dr. 
Klemm arrived in Europe. He refers to them in his work European 
Schools. " I left the bookstore with an armful of pamphlets and books, and 
poorer by thirty-five marks " (p. 40). 



Historical Survey 57 



witness to the cosmopolitan nature of the movement. But 
the four countries into which the Herbartian influence more 
especially extended appear to have been Switzerland, Austria, 
Hungary, and America. 

Why this popularity? Because, as already pointed out, 
Herbartianism was a system, and there was no other well- 
marked educational system in existence, though fragments of 
systems were plentiful. Herbartianism had its great names and 
great ideas ; above all, it had force and enthusiasm. Possibly, 
too, its technical terminology, though repellent to many 
students, was attractive to others, and the enemies of the 
system have even accused its supporters of a love of obscurity 
for its own sake, or for the sake of the philosophic depth which 
obscurity is supposed to suggest. 

But internal dissensions and external attacks were now 
imminent. The more moderate Herbartians led by Stoy gradu- 
ally found themselves more and more outnumbered, within the 
" Union for Scientific Pedagogy," by the Zillerian extremists. 
The Herbartian press (which at present numbers eight or nine 
journals) was even richer in production then than now, but it 
was very largely in the hands of Zillerians. 1 Doctrines like 
those of the "historical culture stages" and "concentration 
centres " — doctrines not very distinctly found in Herbart's own 
works — won but little acceptance from the more moderate 
section, but were enthusiastically championed as the only 
orthodoxy by many of Ziller's own followers. Among these 
latter were Vogt, Eein, the two Wigets, Barth, Thrandorf, 
Just, Zillig, x\ckermann, Niederley, Beyer, Bliedner, Grabs, 
Lange, Flugel, Pickel, Thilo, Staude, Conrad, and Florin, while 
among the Herbartians or semi-Herbartians who refused 
slavishly to follow Ziller were Dorpfeld, Sallwiirk, Striimpell, 
Kern, Frick, Wiessner, Schumann, Credner, and Frohlich ; 
some of these would be regarded as followers of Stoy. 



ir The Year-books of the Union were edited by Ziller; Pddagogische 
Studien by Rein ; Erziehungsschule by Barth. Stoy's own journal, Allge- 
meine ScJiulzeitung, expired in 1882. 



58 The Critics of Herbartianism 

The great offence which the Zillerians committed was, as we 
have seen, to claim to be alone " scientific ". This word was 
inscribed on the name of their Union and on the covers of their 
journal. Their leader had pronounced the vast majority of 
German teachers to be " vulgar pedagogues," " mercenaries," 
and so forth, and the German schools to be, for the most part, 
" un-educative " (in the Herbartian sense). That leader died 
in 1882 before the storm burst in full fury. On his death his 
Seminar, like the previous ones of Herbart and Stoy, ceased 
to exist ; but the " Union for Scientific Pedagogy " still held 
its ground, Professor Vogt of Vienna, a Catholic, but a de- 
voted Zillerian, taking the place vacated by Ziller, which, in 
justice, ought, perhaps, to have fallen to the veteran Stoy. 
But the breach between the moderate and the extreme sections 
was now clearly marked. 

As early as 1880 Dr. von Sallwurk, 1 of Carlsruhe, though 
himself a member of Ziller's Union, had protested, in an 
anonymous work entitled Herbart and his Disciples, against 
the arrogance of the extremists and their efforts to obtain 
patronage from the State. This was a signal for a number 
of similar attacks. In 1881 Dr. Bartels, speaking at a teachers' 
conference in Carlsruhe, raised objections to " concentration " 
and other doctrines of Ziller, declaring them to be artificial and 
impracticable. Dr. Sander, of Breslau, raised similar protests, 
while praising in no stinted terms the industry and enthusiasm 
of Ziller. Frohlich, another member of the Union, expressed 
(1883), in a work entitled The Scientific Pedagogy represented 
in its Fundamental Doctrines and elucidated by Examples, his 
disapproval of the arrogance of the Zillerians. He, like Sall- 
wurk, had once been a follower of Ziller, but his zeal had 
cooled, and had given place to a critical, though still re- 
spectful, attitude of mind. Especially did he protest against 
the " concentration " doctrine as containing " a whole nest of 



Now one of the most eminent educationists in Germany, editor of 
Herbart's works, contributor to the magnificent Encyclopcedisches Hand- 
buch der Padagogik, etc. 



Historical Survey 59 



singularities ". l The " historical culture stages " doctrine and 
the doctrine of Gesinnungs-unterricht also came in for criticism. 

Even enthusiastic and avowed Zillerians had not scrupled to 
modify the proposals of their master. In 1878 and the following 
years appeared the important work of Dr. Eein and his colleagues, 
Theory and Practice of Instruction in the Elementary School 
according to Herbartian Principles. 2 In this work, perhaps 
the most comprehensive and laborious which has proceeded 
from the Herbartian school (besides a copious historical and 
general introduction it gives complete courses for all eight 
school years), we find Ziller's scheme already altered in several 
important respects. The possibility of having one single centre 
of instruction was abandoned ; that is to say, a perfect system 
of " concentration " was admitted to be impossible. Even Ziller 
himself had shown signs of wholesome and increasing modesty, 
and had admitted (e.g., in the Year-book of 1881, and earlier in 
a reply to Andreas, 1878) that " concentration " in the original 
sense could not be carried out, and that each subject of instruc- 
tion must retain its own character, and not be entirely subordin- 
ated to the claims and methods of Gesinnungs-unterricht. 

But a more pronounced opponent than any hitherto mentioned 
was now coming forward. Dittes, in 1870, had interrogated 
Ziller as to certain obscurities in the " Year-book " of the Union. 
Ziller's reply (in Stoy's Schulzeitung , 1871) is declared by an 
anti-Zillerian 3 to have been " angry " and " offensive ". 4 Other 
controversies followed between the two ; and in 1881 Dittes, in 
his journal Padagogium, called attention to Sallwiirk's attack 
(see above), and in 1884 to that of Frohlich. Dittes, who was 
a Vienna educationist of no mean standing, was especially in- 
dignant at the Zillerian claim to be alone " scientific ". 

He now devoted himself to a thorough criticism of the Her- 
bartian principles. His chief articles upon the subject appeared 

1 Ein ganzes Nest von Sonderbarkeiten. 

2 Theorie und Praxis des Volksschul - unterrichts nach Herbartsclien 
Grundsatzen. 

3 Wesendonck. The Schule Herb art- Ziller, p. 33. 

4 " Geharnischt " and " widerwarfcig ", 



60 The Critics of Herbartianism 

in Padagogium, 1885-6. They were the signal for a whole 
series of attacks and counter-attacks distinguished by no small 
degree of acerbity on both sides. 

Frohlich, who had hitherto been treated with frosty indul- 
gence by the Zillerians, now, on the appearance of Dittes in the 
field, came in for his share of condemnation. Zillig, one of the 
ablest of Ziller's followers, replied to the ex-Zillerian in the 
pages of Padagogischen Studien (1884) ; while the pens of 
Eein (ibid.), Beyer (Erziehungsschule), Thrandorf (ibid.), and 
Vogt (in the ''Elucidations" of the "Year-book") followed 
suit in the Zillerian defence. The controversy was a typical 
one. Dittes, in the opinion of Thrandorf, was a "pope" 
"hurling thunderbolts," etc. ; in the opinion of Vogt, guilty of 
" crafty mendacity," 1 etc., and deserving, in consequence of his 
"radicalism," to see his journal (Padagogium) confiscated by 
a respectable Government which wages war against socialism, 
anarchism, and other destructive forces. 

There was really nothing in the articles of Dittes to have 
called forth such language. He was scrupulously respectful 
towards Herbart, freely and frankly admitting the value of 
certain of his proposals. Not a word of abuse or ill-taste can 
be found in his seven or eight articles. Why then the severity 
of the Zillerian rejoinder ? 

We must take the Germans as we find them. They love 
controversy. Their minds are alive. They are strong parti- 
sans. Their polemical vocabulary is ample. Their methods 
are such as would scarcely be possible in England. Whether, 
when they accuse each other of "mendacity," "ignorance," 
" folly," etc., they are to be taken quite seriously, may be 
doubted. But certain it is that the amount of educational 
literature in Germany is so enormous as to betoken an interest 
in Education of which we in England have not the faintest 
conception, Now interest in a subject easily degenerates into 
fanaticism, and when, as with the Herbartian movement, a deep 
moral motive is present, this fanaticism may take extreme forms. 

1 Arglisfcige Verlogenheit. 



Historical Survey 61 



In these controversies the best of the argument was often on 
the side of the Herbart-Ziller party. But truth compels the 
confession that most of the ill-manners was also on the same 
side. The reason we have seen. The zeal of these men was 
so intense as to generate bitterness and intolerance towards 
those who, less earnest, as they thought, than themselves, were 
engaged in pouring the cold water of criticism upon the new 
Gospel. " Away with your petty criticisms ! Men are perish- 
ing." Some such feeling as that here represented lay at the 
base of Herbartian intolerance. 

Probably if a school of educational workers were to arise in 
our country animated by the same spirit of moral reform which 
pervades Herbartianism, history would repeat itself. Apathy, 
ignorance, professional "touchiness" and conceit, would all be 
thrown into the scale against the new movement. "Who are 
you that you should try to teach us who have been school- 
masters for thirty years *? " would be the cry from thousands of 
teachers who, in all their lives, had never given, or perhaps 
had never had the opportunity to give, an hour's serious and 
independent thought to their professional work. Small wonder 
if the new enthusiasts responded with accusations of narrow- 
mindedness and unintelligence, or dubbed the critics "vulgar 
pedagogues," "mere practitioners," "people whose mental 
horizon ended with their noses," and so forth. The latter label, 
indeed, would not be inappropriate if fixed upon some present- 
day schoolmasters, who, as Professor Adams says, 1 can be shown 
to be, with all their modesty, " arrogant and intolerant empirics ". 

Considerations such as these throw light upon Herbartian 
intolerance, though without entirely excusing it. A body of 
moral and educational reformers faced by the problem of com- 
parative apathy among teachers, and yet conscious of a high 
mission, almost inevitably developed a tone of arrogance and 
contempt. Their earnestness blinded them to the value of the 
work of non-Herbartians ; they became morbidly sensitive to 
criticism, and could see nothing in it but the selfish cry of time- 
servers and mercenaries, "Trouble us not". 



Herbartian PsycJiology, p. 5. 



62 The Critics of Herbartianism 

8. More Controversy. 

To resume our historical survey. 

Little need be said as to the progress of the Herbartian 
movement in Switzerland. The Protestant cantons were some- 
what receptive, and one of the ablest of the Zillerians, Theodor 
Wiget, founded and edited a journal in the interests of the new 
Gospel. 1 A critic appeared in the person of Kuoni (1883). 

About the same time a conference of Saxony school directors 
discussed the question, " How far are the Herbart-Stoy-Ziller 
principles to be applied in the higher schools ? " and reports 
came in from various sides. On the whole the verdict of the 
conference was favourable, though Herbart's psychology was con- 
demned as one-sided and " unchristian," and certain of Ziller's 
proposals, such as "concentration," came in for criticism. 

Simultaneously with the Pddagogium articles of Dittes ap- 
peared an able work by Dr. Bartels, entitled The Applicability 
of the Herbart-Z iller-Stoy Principles of Teaching to Instruction 
in Lower Schools. 

Bartels saw the good points in Herbartianism, but showed 
that many of its doctrines were not by any means absolutely 
original. He put in a word for the doctrine of "concentric 
circles" 2 (the polar opposite of the "culture epochs" doctrine 
and strongly opposed by Zillerians). He approved of the 
"formal steps" doctrine, though he saw that it could easily 
degenerate into rigid formalism. The " culture steps " doctrine 
he attacked. Finally he claimed that the Zillerian proposals 
could not possibly be carried into complete execution. " Not 
pretty words but deeds do we wish to see." He was answered 
by Gopfert. 

Readers of the present work have probably now learnt enough 
upon the subject of the Herbartian controversies in Germany. 

1 Swiss Pages for Educative Instruction. 

2 The doctrine that the youngest pupils should be taught a little matter 
which is to be increased and recapitulated as they go up the school, the 
instruction widening out, so to speak, from a fixed centre. The Zillerians 
select special matter for each year. 



Historical Survey 63 

In truth the story is a long and, to some extent, a wearisome 
one. The same points which were agitated in 1882 are being 
agitated at the present moment, the same arguments are being 
brought forward, the same charges being made, now as then. 
Wearisome, truly, and yet interesting in a way, for such a 
wealth of controversial zeal and such irrefragable indications of 
interest in education are simply unintelligible in our country. 
We cannot imagine what these Germans have to write about. 
But they do write, and they do think ; and though much of their 
writing and thinking is but going over old ground it is not old 
ground to British readers. 

There is little need to consider the controversies which 
followed upon the time at which we have arrived, though one 
which centred round the name of Dr. Just of Altenburg (an 
able living Zillerian) might have merited some attention. 

Eissmann's name should also be mentioned. Though he has 
contributed no large work to the Herbartian question, he has 
vigorously attacked the Zillerians in a series of articles which, 
commencing in 1880, have appeared in various journals for 
years past. His arguments are the old ones : that the Zillerians 
are arrogant, their theories insecure owing to the comparative 
neglect of the teachings of experience, the claims of society are 
ignored in favour of those of the individual, and so forth. Other 
anti- Zillerians who wrote during the critical years of Herbar- 
tianism were Willmann (an Herbartian but not a bigoted one), 
Wesendonck l (a frequent contributor to Dittes' journal, Pclda- 
gogium), and Ostermann. The latter writer published in 1884 
a very important and valuable criticism of the psychology of 
the Herbartian school under the title, The Chief Errors of the 
Herbartian Psychology and their Pedagogical Consequences. 2 
This was a very necessary piece of work ; for though Herbart's 
psychology had often been criticised by professional philoso- 



1 The present writer is much indebted to Wesendonck's articles for infor- 
mation on the history of the Herbartian controversy. 

2 Die hauptsachlichsten Irrtiimer der Herbartschen PsycJwlogie und ihre 
padagogischen Konsequenzen (Schulzesche Hof-Buchhandlung, Oldenburg). 



64 The Critics of Herbartianisrn 

phers, and though incidental criticisms had appeared in peda- 
gogical books and articles, apparently no writer had attempted 
a complete popular investigation of the whole psychological 
side of Herbart's work. Ostermann performed his task well. 
He showed how impossible it was to resolve the whole mental 
life into a presentational series : how, if the attempt be made, 
it results in an undervaluing of the other sides of mental life 
(Feeling, etc.) and also an undervaluing of physical Education ; 
and how the later psychologists of the Herbartian school have 
substantially departed from the purely presentational stand- 
point of their master. He draws the inference that this 
standpoint is clearly an impossible one. His work is one of 
the few which are absolutely indispensable to the student of 
the Herbartian question. 1 

And so the controversy has gone on down to the present 
time. Men come forward with attacks upon Herbart's psychology 
or Ziller's "culture steps" doctrine: they retail the old argu- 
ments ; they receive the same answers. What happened in 
the case of Ostermann happened more recently in the case of 
Professor Paul Natorp, of Marburg, who, in 1897, delivered a 
course of eight pedagogical lectures during the vacation at that 
University. He took for their title, Herbart, Pestalozzi and the 
Present-day Problems of Educational Doctrine ; 2 dealt with the 
question mainly from the philosophical standpoint ; claimed (as 
a Neo-Kantian) that Will rather than presentations should 
receive the chief stress in any educational doctrine, and finally 
urged that Pestalozzi's standpoint was sounder and more 
philosophic than Herbart's. Natorp's work is more important 
from the standpoint of theory than from that of practice in 

1 The Herbartian defence against Ostermann fell to Pastor 0. Flugel. 
In 1887 appeared his Ostermann ilber Herbarts Psychologie (Beyer, Lan- 
gensalza) ; Ostermann replied with Zur Herbart-Frage (Schulzesche Hof- 
Buchhandlung, Oldenburg, 1888) ; Flugel followed in the Zeitschrift fur 
Exacte Philosophie, 1888 ; and Ostermann gave the final touches in the 
Padagogischen Jahresbericht, 1888. 

2 Herbart, Pestalozzi und die heutigen Aufgaben der Erziehungslehre 
(Fromman, Stuttgart). 



Historical Survey 65 



the narrower sense, and he hardly mentions Ziller. This is 
always a mistake ; for the Herbartian system is par excellence, 
a pedagogical system, and on its excellence as such it must 
stand or fall. Doubtless its philosophical " foundations " have 
to be reckoned with, but it is a mistake to suppose that the 
imperfection of these supposed foundations is necessarily trace- 
able also in the superstructure. Historically, we have seen, 
Herbartianism began as a pedagogical system, and its philosophi- 
cal principles were sought for subsequently. Possibly, therefore, 
considerable modifications in the presentational doctrine of the 
founder may be made without any danger to the system as a 
whole. 

This fact is not, perhaps, adequately recognised even by lead- 
ing Herbartians. At any rate Natorp's attack, like the previous 
attacks of Dittes, Ostermann, and others, gave rise to spirited 
rejoinders from the leaders of the school. These rejoinders 
appeared in the Zeitschrift fur Philosophic und PddagogiJc of 
1899, and came from the pens of Willmann, Flugel, Just, and 
Eein. 

Among other recent opponents of the new school of pedagogy 
may be mentioned Bergemann and Linde, both of whom have 
made suggestive criticisms, though most of these may be found, 
if sought for, in earlier writings. Still, a student interested in 
the most recent treatment of the problems may be referred to 
these two writers, who show a welcome tendency to avoid 
metaphysics. 1 

9. Present Position of Herbartianism in Germany. 

The present tendency of the Herbartian movement is in the 
direction of a practical grappling with the detailed problems 
of school life. From Herbart's " reals" to the teaching of 

1 Special mention should be made of Linde's Der darstellende Unterricht 
(Brandstetter, Leipzig) and Bergemann's Die Lehre von den formalen und 
den Kulturhistorischen Stufen (Haacke, Leipzig). Both writers have 
also contributed voluminously to Neue Bahnen and other anti-Herbartian 
journals. 

5 



66 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Drawing is a far cry. The Herbartians feel this. They still 
enter, on occasion, into the metaphysical territory, but their 
main interest is, as it should be, the improvement of school 
method. In one department of school work their labours have 
been specially notable — the department of Eeligious Instruction. 
Whatever opinions may be held on this subject, all will agree 
that if Eeligious Instruction be given at all it should be given 
as well and as thoughtfully as possible. The Herbartians, in 
their zeal for character-forming, have noted the inefficiency and 
absurdity of much of the teaching given under the aegis of the 
Lutheran Church. Thus they -have attacked catechism -teaching 
and mechanical memorising as unpsychological, and have ad- 
vocated a more careful selection of material than is customary. 
Especially have Ziller's proposals roused keen discussion, and 
improvements are bound to follow. Dorpfeld, too, was a promi- 
nent advocate of reform in Eeligious Instruction. 

The result is that from the Herbartians have come, of recent 
years, many first-class school-books dealing with this subject. 
The three-volumed work of Dr. Staude (Preparations for the 
Biblical History of the Old and New Testament) has gone 
through eleven or twelve editions ; a laborious and thorough 
work it is ; orthodox, yet suggestive. But Thrandorf and 
Meltzer have gone further than Staude, as, for example, 
in their work, Eeligious Instruction at the Middle Stage 
of the Lower School and in the Lower Classes of Higher 
Schools — Preparations on a Psychological Method. Their 
" method " is not only psychological, for the existence of 
modern critical problems is by no means unrecognised in 
this work, and great theological writers like Wellhausen are 
frequently referred to. The second volume of this work is 
devoted to the prophets, an almost wholly unexplored region 
for English teachers and pupils. 

Still more revolutionary are the works of Dr. Heyn. 1 These 
are for the teachers of the highest classes in schools. There is 
absolutely nothing in English which is comparable, in learning, 

1 Geschichte Israels, Geschichte Jesu. 



Historical Survey 67 



in skilfulness of treatment, and in rich suggestiveness with 
these works. The youths who are instructed on Dr. Heyn's 
plan must become equal in knowledge of the Bible to the 
majority of English ministers of religion. Let us picture 
for the moment boys in our Grammar Schools being in- 
oculated with Holzmann, Nippold, Wellhausen, Weiss, and 
Harnack ! Such a procedure may be wise or unwise ; it is 
certainly striking. 1 

The works of Staude, Thrandorf, Meltzer, and Heyn are 
types of the kind of school-book now being yearly brought 
out by the Herbartians. Each lesson is worked out on the 
" formal steps " principle. But merely to mention the various 
works which have appeared on the subject of biblical teaching 
during the past four or five years would fill several pages of 
this book. Five or six works on the life of Jesus appeared 
almost within a single year, any one of which would excel in 
boldness and thoroughness of treatment any school-book we 
possess on the subject. 

Eeligious Instruction is hot the only subject at which the 
Herbartians are working hard, but it is perhaps the one in 
which their efforts appear most original. Articles and books 
come almost daily from their press dealing with every depart- 
ment of school- activity. Metaphysics, psychology, and ethics 
are left to Pastor Fliigel and other recognised veterans who 
have survived the older battles ; the younger Herbartians are 
" practical men," only, unlike the " practical" teachers of some 
countries, these young Herbartians have principles of their own. 
In the present-day Herbartian movement Theory and Practice 
have at last met on equal terms. 

" What then," it may be asked, "is the future of Herbar- 
tianism?" The question is no easy one to answer. There is 
much difficulty in ascertaining the precise number of adherents 
which Herbartianism possesses even if we consider only its 
native country. The difficulty arises from two facts. First, as 

1 Some selections from Heyn are to be found in the present writer's book 
published last year (The Reform of Moral and Biblical Education). 



68 The Critics of Herbartianism 

we have seen, a teacher may belong to an Herbartian Society — 
even to the most extreme society, Ziller's Union — without 
being committed to an approval of all the proposals put forward 
by the leaders of the movement. Secondly, there is every reason 
to believe that many teachers are in sympathy with Herbar- 
tianism who are quite unconnected with any organisation. 
These two facts tend, of course, to neutralise each other. Of 
the two, probably the second is the more important. However, 
there seems every reason to believe that several thousands of 
German teachers draw their inspiration from Herbart and his 
followers, Stoy, Ziller, and Dorpfeld. Several hundred belong 
to Ziller's Union, several hundred more to the Westphalian and 
Thuringian Societies, several hundred more to other societies. 

Are the Herbartian teachers of the elementary or of the 
secondary grade? Of both. Herbartianism has a peculiar 
adaptedness to elementary schools. But in Germany, as in 
England, teachers in such schools are for various reasons not so 
able or willing to adopt new proposals as teachers in higher 
schools. Still an appreciable influence has been exerted by 
Herbartianism upon the lower grades of Education, though 
possibly a still greater influence has been exerted upon the 
higher or secondary grades. 

The second test of the condition of present-day Herbartianism 
is its literary output. This has been already mentioned in 
referring to Religious Instruction. But a few further rough 
statistics may be given. 

Quoting from Die Herbartische Padagogik in der- Litteratur 
(a supplement to Herbart und die Herbartianer), we find that 
from 1895 to 1899 about 200 books or articles came from the 
Herbartian School dealing with general pedagogical questions ; 
about 160 dealing with the various parts of Gesinnungs-unter- 
richt, especially biblical teaching and history ; considerable 
numbers dealing with drawing, languages, geography, science, 
and especially mathematics. Other books and articles deal 
with discipline, athletics, the philosophy and history of Educa- 
tion, and so forth. 

The German Herbartians alone produce certainly ten times 



Historical^ Survey 69 



as many serious contributions to educational literature as all 
the teachers of Britain. Under " serious contributions " there 
is no need to include "reading-books," "exercises in arith- 
metic," and so forth. 

New men have taken the places vacated by Stoy, Dorpfeld 
and Ziller. Dr. Rein maintains the Zillerian banner at Jena ; 
and though Dr. Frick, once "the best-hated pedagogue in 
Prussia," and the head of the great " Francke Stiftungen " at 
Halle, is no more, 1 men like Ackermann, Just, Ufer, Lange, 
Sallwurk and Beyer live on, and others are rising to hand down 
the Herbartian — in some cases the Zillerian — tradition. Though 
its pages are not confined to Herbartian writers, the Encyclopad- 
isches Handbuch der Padagogik is really a magnificent tribute 
to Herbartian 4 zeal. 

10. Herbartianism in Britain. 

In the British Isles Herbartianism — mainly in the form of 
Zillerianism — obtained a precarious foothold some years ago. 
Precarious; for the origin of the movement was scarcely 
recognised and its philosophical meaning almost wholly ignored. 
Still, one is bound to recognise in the scheme adopted some 
time back by the Halifax School Board an honest attempt to 
unify or " concentrate " the curriculum. Thus the history and 
geography of Scotland were taught in connection with each 
other ; ancient weapons of war (used at Bannockburn, etc.) 
were to be drawn by the children, while maps of the Scottish 
river-basins, plans of battles, composition themes, reading-books, 
and pieces for recitation were all to be made or selected in 
accordance with the same general scheme. Praiseworthy though 
the attempt was, it does not appear to have won the favour of 
the teachers ; whether this fact is a reflection on the scheme or 
on the teachers need not be discussed. In other places a more 
partial " concentration " has been or is being attempted ; com- 

1 For details of Dr. Frick's work see De Garmo's Herbart and the Her- 
bartians, and Klemm's European Schools. For Dr. Rein's work at Jena 
consult De Garmo, or Miss Dodd's Introduction. 



7o The Critics of Herbartianis7n 



position themes are being selected from the subject matter of 
other lessons ; history and geography, sometimes literature 
also, are kept more or less in relation to each other. But, on 
the whole, though Professor Armstrong may pour contempt 
upon the plan of ' ' chopping our lives up into three-quarters- 
of-an-hour sections, during each of which we do some- 
thing different," and may urge the necessity for assimilating 
scholastic procedure to the methods of ordinary life, 1 the 
rigidity of the time-table seems to defy serious attack. Partly 
this is due to governmental necessities, but largely also to lack 
of culture and want of mental elasticity on the part of teachers. 

In the higher departments of educational work we see distinct 
signs that the rigid barriers once existent even between kindred 
subjects are being broken down, and that the need for grouping 
together such subjects is becoming recognised. The Matricula- 
tion Examination of the University of London has borne witness 
to this tendency, as, for example, when history and geography 
were grouped together, and " general elementary science " 
rather than any definite branch of science was prescribed. 
Workshop practice, " Sloyd," etc., are being made to bear upon 
the needs of the physical laboratory ; 2 reading books are be- 
coming less " scrappy " ; the partitions between different 
branches of mathematics are, thanks to Mr. Branford, 3 Pro- 
fessor Perry, and others, being removed, and possibly before 
long the absurdity of employing a science teacher distinct 
from the teacher of mathematics will become obvious. The 
increasing importance now being attached to a general subject 
like "Nature Study" also witnesses to a growing feeling that 
knowledge should be unified to the highest possible degree, and, 
indeed, one of its advocates has suggested it as a focus for the 
curriculum. 4 

The other Zillerian doctrine — that of " culture stages " — has 

1 Professor Laurie says somewhere in his Institutes, " life and the school 
should be never disjointed ". 

2 Findlay, Principles of Class Teaching, p. 359. 

3 Journal of Education, September, 1898. 

4 Professor Patrick Geddes. See the present writer's Student's Herbart, 
p. 74. 



Historical Survey 71 



also obtained some recognition, though possibly the impulse in 
this case has not come exclusively from Germany, but has 
rather resulted from the general spread of evolutionary thought. 
Certain it is that Herbert Spencer proclaimed the essential 
features of the doctrine some years before Zillerianism became 
influential in Germany. In point of fact the claim for priority 
is here rather ridiculous, as the doctrine is traceable in many 
writers who lived long before either Spencer or Ziller ; in 
Goethe, in Lessing, even in Clement of Alexandria. 

But the books which, written in English, bear the clearest 
signs of Zillerian influence are not often English books, except 
in such cases as that of Miss Dodd's Introduction to Herbartian 
Principles of Teaching, where the influence is admitted on the 
title page. They are American. Dr. Adler's book, 1 for example, 
and the recently published collection of essays on Keligious 
Education edited by Bishop Potter, 2 could scarcely have been 
produced in a country like England, where neither teachers nor 
professors of Education concern themselves with problems of 
the kind therein discussed. 3 Canon Bell's Religious Education in 
Secondary Schools 4 shows what might be thought to be (when 
looked at through a magnifying glass) a few traces of Zil- 
lerianism, as when, for example, he points out that the Old 
Testament has a certain affinity with the moral nature of 
young people. Much more distinctly is the "culture stages" 
doctrine recognisable in the new movement for reformed mathe- 
matical and science teaching. Men are beginning to preach 
that the child in its educational development must, to a certain 

1 The Moral Instruction of Children (Arnold). 

2 Principles of Religious Education (Longmans). See Dr. Stanley Hall's 
essay and especially the words already quoted : " The child has to repeat 
a great many pre-Christian stages of evolution in its own life," for 
" Christianity came late in the history of the world." We must " bring 
the stress of teaching Christianity a little later than we put it ". Clearly, 
Ziller has his up-to-date followers ! 

3 Professor Adams's little Primer on Teaching, with Special Reference to 
Sunday School Work (T. & T. Clark) is a recent and welcome exception to 
this statement. 

4 Macmillan. 



72 The Critics of Herbartianism 



extent, recapitulate the history of the race, discovering anew 
the composition of the atmosphere, passing from empirical 
mathematics to abstract, and so forth. The doctrine is not 
without its difficulties ; but it is also not without a rich and 
almost immeasurable suggestiveness. 

But, after all, "concentration" and "culture stages" are 
Herbartian doctrines only in a derived sense. Absolutely Her- 
bartian are the doctrine of the formal steps, the doctrine of 
many-sided Interest, and the emphasis upon the value of 
humanistic subjects (history, literature, etc.). How fare these 
in Britain ? The answer is disappointing. 

True, the five steps of Instruction are used in several of the 
training institutions connected with Universities or University 
Colleges, and recently a disappointing book of lessons supposed 
to be drawn up along Herbartian lines has been published. 
But, on the whole, this undoubtedly valuable part of the Her- 
bartian system has been neglected, and probably will continue 
to be neglected until the nation and until boards of managers 
definitely ask for new light and new methods. 

The great central Herbartian doctrine of " many-sided 
Interest" has exerted practically no influence beyond a super- 
ficial one. It may have helped to make lessons easy and 
"interesting," but this is not Herbartianism. 1 "Instruction 
requires toil on the pupil's part." The vital moral bearings of 
the doctrine have scarcely been thought of, and even our most 
brilliant writers on the system seem fearful lest, by straying 
into this ethical region, they will earn the painful reproach of 
being " fanatical ". The lady writers on the subject here show 
a good example, but, on the whole, confession must be made 
that the proclamation of the gospel of " many-sided Interest " 
— a gospel of moral reform and spiritual regeneration — has been 
feeble and unworthy. 

Strangely, sadly, unaccountably obtuse have we been to the 
last Herbartian doctrine here to be mentioned — the doctrine of 
Gesinnungs-unterricht or "character-forming Instruction," the 

1 See the Student's Herbart, pp. 51-53. 



Historical Survey 73 



doctrine which sees enormous and unique value in fairy tale, 
legend, history, and literature. With a national history far 
surpassing that of Germany or America in continuity and in 
capabilities for moral instruction, we are content to remain 
uninspired by its lessons, unmoved by its great names, ignorant 
of its movements, deaf to its voices. A true educationist, when 
told of recent revivals of "patriotism," can but smile sardoni- 
cally when he contemplates the damning facts that Alfred the 
Great and Earl Simon are practically unknown in the land 
they loved ; that it is the hardest possible task to get a " patrio- 
tic " audience (or any other audience) to read the history of 
their own land, still more that of any other land ; that the 
elementary schoolmaster, called upon to conduct an Evening 
Continuation School, may babble " Commercial Arithmetic," 
but will scarcely even dream of opening the sealed book of 
English literature, though brought down to our very alleys in a 
penny form 1 ; that our very Churches, though professedly wor- 
shipping " whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are 
honourable, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are 
pure, whatsoever things are lovely," 2 show by their weekly 
bills of fare that the " whatsoever " is, for them, pitiably poor ; 
that the secondary schools of Britain teach more Greek and 
Latin than English, and that the English they teach is sometimes 
technical and uninspiring ; and that our very M.P.'s would, in 
the opinion of an eminent authority, make fewer mistakes if 
they knew a little more history. 3 Astounding, unaccountable, 
well-nigh criminal is our neglect of the subjects which, above 
all others, are culture -giving and character-forming. But it is 
of a piece with our whole conduct. With one voice we hail 
" Beligious Instruction" as peculiarly "sacred," and proceed 
to fence it off and deprive it of interest ; with another voice we 
hail all other Instruction as "secular," and proceed to degrade 
it to base utilitarian ends. Pitman's shorthand displaces his- 
tory ! "commercial arithmetic" displaces literature! 

1 Mr. Stead's Penny Poets, etc. 2 Philippians iv. 8. 

3 Address of the President of the Eoyal Historical Society, 20th February, 
1902. 



74 The Critics of Herbartianism 



Only from one standpoint is the outlook satisfactory ; Her- 
bartian writings are now fairly copious in Britain, and are 
steadily increasing in number. Mr. and Mrs. Felkin deserve 
the gratitude of all educationists for their pioneer work x ; thanks 
mainly to them Herbart can now be read in English, and their 
excellent introductions have done much to make his doctrines 
known. Miss Mulliner's book 2 is not so well known as it 
deserves to be ; Miss Dodd's 3 is also a good piece of work on 
constructive lines, written with the ardour of an enthusiast. 
There are translations of Ufer, Eein, and Lange (in each case 
by Americans) ; there is Professor De Garmo's Herbart and the 
Herbartians 4 with its admirable account of the labours of 
Herbart' s followers, Ziller, Eein, Lange, Stoy, and Frick, and 
of the progress of the movement in America ; there is the little 
Student's Herbart 5 by the present writer, with its regressive 
treatment of the whole question; above all these are two 
books of marked originality, that of Professor Adams and 
that of Dr. Findlay. The former 6 it would be superfluous 
to praise ; it is unique. The latter, 7 except where, incidentally, 
the author's knowledge of the life of Nicholas Nickleby 
shows signs of excusable rustiness, is also admirable in every 
respect — nay, in certain matters markedly original. It is the 
very book which British Education needs ; mainly Herbartian, 
as when it lays stress upon the content of the mind, the process 
of apperception, the use of the formal steps, the value of history, 
and so forth; but boldly departing from Herbartian doctrine 
where the latter reveals its weakness, namely in that department 
of scholastic work which deals not with the conferring of ideas, 
but with the imparting of skill in speech and in other directions. 

1 Herbart's Science of Education, and Letters and Lectures (Sonnen- 
schein) ; also Introduction to HerbarVs Science and Practice of Education 
(Sonnenschein). 

2 Application of Psychology to Education (Sonnenschein). 

3 Introduction to the Herbartian Principles of Teaching (Sonnenschein). 

4 Heinemann. 5 Sonnenschein. 

6 Herbartian Psychology applied to Education (Isbister). 

7 Principles of Class Teaching (Macmillan). 



Historical Survey 75 



But nowhere in Britain is there an Herbartian school, training 
college, or institute. Nowhere, at least, except in Manchester, 
where Miss Dodd, with the usual enthusiasm of a Zillerian, has 
succeeded in founding a practising school in connection with 
the Day Training College of that city. It is significant that 
Day Training Colleges, unless an Herbartian happens to be in 
charge, have to exist without such an institution. 

11. Herbartianism in America and Elsewhere. 

Far more impressive is Herbartian progress in America than 
in Britain. The reader cannot help having been struck by the 
fact that a number of the works above mentioned are by 
Americans. The truth is, as Dr. Eckoff says, 1 " American 
educators have begun to live, move, and have their being in 
an atmosphere of Herbartianism ". That this has its dangers 
is obvious from the complaint raised by some critics that " soft 
pedagogy" is too prevalent west of the Atlantic, and there is 
little doubt that, in the hands of extremists, Herbartianism can 
become deficient in strenuousness and backbone. But, on the 
whole, the new movement is working wonders. It makes 
teachers into enthusiasts, and any movement that can accom- 
plish such a task as that must be almost infinitely valuable. 

In 1892 a " Herbart Club " was organised at Saratoga, and 
consists mainly of teachers. The works of Lange and Ufer and 
Herbart' s Psychology have been translated by members of this 
club. Professor De Garmo, one of its leading spirits, has also 
published several valuable works of his own upon the subject.- 
Dr. McMurry and Colonel Parker have contributed to the theory 
and practice of " culture stages " and " concentration " ; to the 
latter of which American history somewhat lends itself (periods 
of settlement, etc.). Hiawatha is extensively used in American 
schools, and its use is to an extent defended on Zillerian or 



1 HerbarVs ABC of Sense Perception, p. xiv. (Arnold). 
2 His latest, Interest and Educatioii (Macmillan), presents some special 
features of importance. See pp. 96-7. 



76 The Critics of Herbartianism 



Herbartian principles. Dr. Dewey's name should, of course, be 
mentioned also. But it would be superfluous to expatiate further 
upon the progress of the movement among our cousins. 

Nor is there special need to refer to its progress in other 
countries. If we are to judge by the bibliography of Herbart- 
ianism, Austria, Holland, Scandinavia, Hungary, Switzerland, 
have all received stimulus, while, on the other hand, Latin and 
Sclavonic nations have paid but little attention to the move- 
ment. It represents the one great effort of the Protestant and 
Teutonic world to make Education simultaneously into a Science 
and into a Gospel. Say what we will, criticise how we like, it 
is a movement to be reckoned with. 



PART III. 

HEEBAETIAN LITERATURE IN ENGLISH. 

It has been thought well to give, as supplementary to the pre- 
ceding historical sketch, notices of the chief works in English 
which are, partly or wholly, Herbartian in spirit or origin. 
Such works may be divided into three groups : — 

(1) Translations of the writings of Herbart and his followers ; 
such translations are generally prefaced by expository introduc- 
tions, and may, to this extent, fall in group two. 

(2) Expositions of Herbartian principles, and of the Herbar- 
tian movement in general. 

(3) Works which, though based largely or wholly on Herbar- 
tian principles, represent independent efforts at construction ; 
works which are genuinely national, though they may owe much 
inspiration to foreign writers. 

As witnesses to the progress of the Herbartian movement, 
the third group is the most important, and the first the least 
important of the three. The pioneer work of translation under- 
taken by Mr. and Mrs. Felkin was necessary, but, once accom- 
plished, had to give place to more constructive efforts in the 
direction of nationalising Herbartianism. Britain will scarcely 
borrow the Herbartian system en bloc, hence the most signifi- 
cant books on the subject are, at the present moment, those 
like Dr. Findlay's, in which we see the system arraying itself 
in garments not obviously foreign. 

In the following notices special attention will therefore be 
given to the several books belonging to the third class, less 
attention to those of the second class, and least attention of all 



78 The Critics of Herbartianism 

to those books, however valuable in themselves, which are but 
translations of German originals. 

(1) Teanslations. 

The Science of Education ; Its General Principles Deduced 
from its Aim : and the JEsthetic Revelation of the 
World. By J. R Herbart. Translated from the 
German with a Biographical Introduction by Henry 
M. and Emmie Felkin. (Sonnenschein.) 
This book is indispensable to the genuine student of education 
unless he is able to read Herbart in the original ; it is the trans- 
lation of Herbart's masterpiece, Allgemeine Pddagogik. But the 
work would be difficult for a beginner, though the translators 
have added a useful and able introduction. 

Letters and Lectures on Education. By J. F. Herbart. Trans- 
lated from the German and Edited with an Introduction 
by Henry M. and Emmie Felkin. (Sonnenschein.) 

Herbart's letters, here translated, are those he wrote to 
Herr von Steiger, the father of the three pupils placed under 
his charge during the years 1797-9. They represent Herbart's 
earliest thoughts on educational matters, but are otherwise 
unimportant. 

Herbart's lectures, on the other hand, represent his most 
mature thought. They were delivered only a few years before 
his death, and many years after the composition of the Allge- 
meine Pddagogik. They are considerably easier in every respect 
than that work. 

Outlines of Educational Doctrines. By J. F. Herbart. Translated 
by A. F. Lange. Annotated by Charles de Garmo. (The 
Macmillan Company.) 
This work, despite its title, is really a translation of Herbart's 
Lectures, and is thus a duplicate of the last work. With so 
much Herbartian territory still untrodden (e.g., the works of 
Dorpfeld) it is to be regretted that two authors should under- 
take the same task. 



Herbartian Literature in English 79 

Still this translation is a good one ; moreover Dr. de Garmo's 
notes touch upon some of the recent advances in American 
pedagogy. 

Herbart's A B G of Sense-Perception and Minor Pedagogical 
Works. Translated, with Introduction, Notes and 
Commentary, by W. J. Eckoff. (Appleton, New York ; 
Arnold, London.) 

This is a translation of several short works and addresses 
produced or delivered by Herbart a few years after the com- 
position of the Steiger letters. They are specially interesting 
as dealing with Herbart's early views upon Pestalozzi ; the 
educationist is feeling his way towards a more complete and 
scientific system than that of his great contemporary and in- 
spirer. The chief work in this volume (The ABC of Anschauung) 
deals with the teaching of mathematics. 

The Application of Psychology to the Science of Education. By 
J. F. Herbart. Translated and Edited with Notes and 
an Introduction to the Study of Herbart by Beatrice C. 
Mulliner. (Sonnenschein.) 

These letters were written during Herbart's Konigsberg period, 
and represent much more mature views and wider experience 
than the Steiger letters, the early works published at Gottingen, 
and even the Allgemeine Pddagogik. Many of the passages con- 
tained in them were subsequently employed in Herbart's Text- 
book of Psychology. The present volume will be, perhaps, more 
attractive to the majority of students on account of Miss 
Mulliner's able Introduction than on account of the letters 
themselves. The editor has illumined the subject with many 
wise remarks and pertinent references ; she writes with ardour 
and force. 

A Text-book of Psychology. By J. F. Herbart. Translated by 
Margaret K. Smith. (Appleton, New York ; Arnold, 
London.) 

Important for the student of Herbart's psychology, but re- 
pellant, owing to its very condensation, to the average student. 



80 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Outlines of Pedagogics. By Prof. W. Eein. Translated by C. 

C. and Ida J. van Liew, with additional notes by the 

former. (Sonnenschein.) 
This is a translation of Padagogik im Grundriss by the 
prominent Herbartian upon whom has fallen the mantle of 
Ziller. It is brief, but clear and admirable, and will convey to 
most readers a favourable impression of modern Zillerianism. 
The translator, in a few brief notes, has helped to show the 
attitude of American thought towards the movement. 

Introduction to the Pedagogy of Herbart. By C. Ufer. Author- 
ised Translation from the Fifth German Edition under 
the auspices of the Herbart Club. By J. C. Zinser. 
Edited by Charles De Garmo. (Heath, Boston ; Isbister, 
London.) 
C. Ufer is a prominent German Zillerian. His work, here 

translated through the activity of the American " Herbart Club," 

is similar in size and tone to Prof. Eein's. 

Apperception. A Monograph on Psychology and Pedagogy. By 
Dr. K. Lange. Translated by members of the Herbart 
Club. Edited by Charles de Garmo. (Heath, Boston ; 
Isbister, London.) 
This magnificent work on the psychology of Apperception, 
and on the pedagogical consequences and the historical develop- 
ment of the doctrine, needs no praise. No other book, except 
possibly Dorpfeld's Denken und Gedachtnis, has ever dealt 
so ably with the subject. At the same time the translator's 
terminology is confusing in one place, the word " perception " 
standing for what most British psychologists would call " sen- 
sation ". 

(2) Expositions of Herbartianism as Distinguished from 
Translations. 

An Introduction to Herbart' s Science and Practice of Education. 
By Henry M. and Emmie Felkin. (Sonnenschein.) 
This important work is probably the one from which most, 



Herbartian Literature in English 81 



British students of Herbartianism have derived their first know- 
ledge of the movement. 

Beginning with a brief account of the present influential 
position of the Herbartian system, the authors pass on to a 
discussion of the psychological basis worked out by the founder. 
This, and the following chapter on ethics, are both difficult, and 
may repel many " practical teachers " who are pining for mere 
" hints " ; though the writers have illuminated the somewhat 
technical discussion with many a pertinent quotation, the ques- 
tion presents itself whether a better procedure would not have 
been to put the educational problem in the foreground and to 
have worked backwards to psychology and ethics, somewhat 
after Herbart's own fashion. 

In chapter hi., where " practical pedagogy" is reached, the 
meaning of " educative instruction " is expounded and the great 
doctrine of many-sided Interest introduced. Then comes a very 
full section on the " formal steps " and another on the " dual 
theory of the concentration centres and historical culture epochs," 
that is, upon Ziller's development of Herbart's principles. Voigt's 
criticism of this development is given in great fulness and will 
be found highly valuable, as will also the full examples of 
Zillerian procedure. 

The writers translate Zucht by " Discipline " and Eegierung 
by " Government ". While carefully pointing out (p. 156) the 
ambiguity in the word " Discipline " (used by many British 
teachers in the sense of mere " preservation of order ") they 
use it in preference to " Training " as a translation of Zucht. 
This is perhaps a mistake. It is better to translate Zucht 
" Training " or " Moral Training," and Eegierung " Dis- 
cipline ". 

Herbart and the Herbartians. By Charles de Garmo. 
(Heinemann.) 

This book is similar in size and design to the last. Its 
exposition of Herbart's own doctrines is, however, less full, 
but this is compensated for by a good treatment of some of 
Herbart's chief successors, Stoy, Ziller, Dr. Eein, Dr. Lange 

6 



82 The Critics of Herbariianism 

and Frick (Dorpfeld is strangely omitted), and by four chapters 
on the development of Herbartianism in America. The chapters 
on Stoy and Frick are specially noteworthy, inasmuch as these 
two Herbartians are practically unknown to British readers. 
Stoy, as already pointed out, was the leader of the moderate and 
orthodox Herbartians, as distinguished from the more revolu- 
tionary Herbartians who followed Ziller. Frick was the head 
of the great "Francke Stiftungen" at Halle> and in that capacity 
worked out the application of Herbartian principles to secondary 
schools, in which Zillerian " concentration " would be obviously 
difficult. 

An American educationist, whose name is not so well known 
in Britain as it should be, Colonel Parker, worked out (partly, no 
doubt, under Herbartian influence), a scheme of "concentration," 
very different, however, in principle from Ziller' s. Eeaders will 
find details of this in Dr. de Garmo's book. 

The Student's Herbart. A Brief Educational Monograph dealing 
with the Movement Initiated by Herbart and Developed 
by Stoy, Dorpfeld and Ziller. By F. H. Hayward. 
(Sonnenschein.) 

This brochure differs from most expositions of Herbartianism 
in several respects. It is brief. Its thought moves regressively : 
starting with the problem of moral evil the author works back- 
wards to the need for Herbartian Interest, and then again 
backwards to Apperception. Lastly, it contains a brief summary 
of the supposed weaknesses of Herbartianism. 

(3) Original Works Showing the Influence op 
Herbartian Thought. 

The Herbartian Psychology applied to Education. By J. Adams, 
M.A., B.Sc. (Isbister.) 

There are 'not many British books on education that deserve 
the adjective " brilliant ". A William James may write spark- 
ling Talks with Teachers, but William James lives in the stimu- 
lating atmosphere of the Western Continent The above work 



Herbartian Literature i7i English 83 

by the Professor of Education in the University of London is 
British, yet it sparkles. It is, in its own way, unique. 

" Herbartianism," says the writer, " has weaknesses, and 
some of its rivals have points of superiority ; yet it seems to 
me the best system for application to education." " It does 
not follow that the writer is a Herbartian. It is enough that 
he finds this system fits most readily into his own experience, 
and seems to him best suited to explain educational facts to 
others." 

Prof. Adams has little patience with the humdrum empiri- 
cism of the average schoolmaster, which impudently claims to 
be " practical " and based on " experience ". " One main aim 
of this book is to induce the cave-dwellers to move their heads. 
It is unwillingness to turn round and look about them that 
marks the true cave-dweller. Many teachers are content to 
play with the little black puppets of their school world, and 
sturdily refuse to look beyond the school walls, or even to 
admit that there is a beyond. . . . Certainly all that they know 
about education has been known long ago." " The modest 
schoolmaster is an arrogant and intolerant empiric. . . . Such 
teachers haughtily resent any attempt to enlighten them." 

The author proceeds to discuss the relation between psych- 
ology and education, reviewing, in passing on towards Herbar- 
tianism, the systems of Locke and Frobel. 

He points out — it needed very much to be pointed out — 
that Herbartianism and Frobelianism are, in appearance at any 
rate, diametrically opposed. Herbart practically starts, not with 
the mind, but with ideas. 

The soul which he posits is "no more a real soul than it is a 
real crater of a volcano. It has absolutely no content. . . . 
What Locke did for innate ideas Herbart did for innate facul- 
ties. . . . What he has taken from the soul he has transferred 
to the ideas ; . . . these have a vitality all their own." 

The author follows with a lucid explanation of the appercep- 
tion doctrine, one of the best expositions, in a brief form, to 
be found in our language. He shows how this doctrine goes 
beyond mere associationism ; " the associationist explains very 



84 The Critics of Herbartianism 

clearly why each of the ideas has come into the dome of 
consciousness in which it is found, but he neglects to explain 
why the same idea does not follow the same word in each 
case ". It is a case of " apperception masses," not of mere 
associational links. Again, " if Herbartianism did nothing more 
than emphasise the fact that no two people ever have exactly 
the same idea, and particularly that no master and pupil can 
ever have the same idea, it would justify its existence ". The 
cry for " things, not words " would only " substitute one fallacy 
for another ; things are not a whit better than words in ensur- 
ing that the same idea shall be called up in two minds. . . . The 
average child does not see what the master is showing him. . . . 
The Herbartian has none of that reverence for hard facts so 
characteristic of the ' plain man '." In other words, the " ap- 
perception masses " of each individual, even of each child, 
vitally influence the cognition of any new experience ; " unlike 
most psychologies, Herbart's has an obvious and immediate 
bearing upon education," and indeed (though Prof. Adams 
merely hints at this and does not work it out into detail) upon 
morality and conduct. " If the idea that the soul ought to 
choose is not there to choose, what can the soul do but choose 
amiss? " 

Chapter v. deals with " Formal Education " and is immensely 
valuable, in view of the pretensions, alike of classical teachers, 
of advocates of " heuristic " methods, and of admirers of the 
" three E's " as the main pabulum of the primary school. 
These three classes are united in discounting knowledge or 
ideas, and in laying stress upon certain activities. " There is 
a prevailing impression . . . that it really does not matter very 
much what one learns. The culture comes all the same. It is 
not the what ; it is the how." Prof. Adams exposes the fallacy 
of all this. The great thing is ideas, apperception-masses. 
Education in crime is " formally " as high as education in the 
classics ; orchard-robbing, for example, calls out prudence, fore- 
thought, caution, observation, firmness, and so forth. " The 
soul is not a mere knife that may be sharpened on any whet- 
stone, and when sharpened may be applied to any purpose. 



Herbartian Literature in English 85 

The knife takes the character from the whetstone." " We can- 
not separate the mind from its content. . . . Above all, it is 
certain that we cannot exercise the mind in vacuo. . . . The 
choice of subjects is important ; a subject must be chosen for 
its own sake, not for the sake of its general effect in training 
the mind." 

Then follows another chapter on the apperception doctrine ; 
the limitations of ''observation" are pointed out; and then 
come several other luminous chapters, not very distinctively 
Herbartian. 

In his final chapter, that on Interest, Prof. Adams discusses 
the relation between Interest and Attention, and between 
Interest and Apperception : he shows, from the Herbartian 
standpoint, the folly of imposing drudgery on children in order 
to " train " them for the battle of life — the theory which largely 
dominates the procedure of didactic " formalists " ; " the theory 
of interest," he says, " does not propose to banish drudgery, but 
only to make drudgery tolerable by giving it a meaning " : in 
relation to this he again lays stress — as every Herbartian does 
— on a worthy content for all studies ; " it is not necessary 
to go to Eome in order to learn Latin, . . . but it is necessary 
that it should be learnt as something having a meaning in 
itself, not as a mere exercise ". 

The author concludes the most racy book on education in the 
English language with an indication of how Herbartianism may 
be destined to join hands ultimately with Frobel's more organic 
view of life. " The latest word of the Herbartians deposes 
interest from its place as the first principle of education and 
makes it rank second to the principle of self-realisation. 
Interests must be tested by their effect on the child's develop- 
ment, viewed in connection with its place in the organic unity 
of the world in which it has to live." 

Primer on Teaching, with Special Reference to Sunday School 
Work. By J. Adams, M.A., B.Sc, Professor of Education 
in the University of London. (T. & T. Clark.) 
Herbartianism in the Sunday School ! In this little book 

Prof. Adams applies educational principles — including the 



86 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Herbartian " formal steps " — to the work of Biblical teaching. 
Probably the most valuable chapter is the one in which the 
" steps " are expounded and illustrated ; and the section on 
the Socratic method, with illustrations in Prof. Adams's 
characteristic style, is excellent. 

We find, as we should expect, the usual Herbartian emphasis 
on ideas ; "they do seem to have a power of their own". 
" Temptation consists in the effort of an idea to realise itself." 
We find likewise the Herbartian emphasis on creating healthy 
interests rather than on denouncing evil ; " we must fight evil 
indirectly by supplying ideas of good ". " The kind of apper- 
ception masses in the mind really determines what kind of mind 
it is." Apperception and Interest are therefore vital. " The 
business of the teacher is so to arrange the ideas in the mind of 
the pupil that apperceptive attention to desirable things will be 
aroused." Even the sowing of almost chance ideas may result 
in a subsequent harvest ; " very often the teacher must intro- 
duce ideas into the mind of the pupil, not so much for their 
immediate importance as for the use to be made of them at 
some future lesson ". 

Herbartian though he is, and strong opponent of purely 
" formal" teaching, Prof. Adams recognises some value in the 
"training" ideal of the formalists. "The process of working 
for the rule gives the mind a certain amount of training. The 
mind is a better mind because it has done this particular bit of 
work." 

Principles of Class Teaching. By Dr. J. J. Findlay. (Mac- 

millan.) 

Though he admits his indebtedness to Herbartian writers 
like Prof. Eein, Dr. Findlay would object to be labelled " Her- 
bartian ". The label might be regarded as implying an absence 
of originality. Nevertheless, an examination of his book reveals 
the fact that, though it is an original and valuable contribution 
to British educational literature, its merits are entirely those 
which distinguish Herbartian books. If Dr. Findlay is not an 
Herbartian there are no Herbartians in existence. 



Herbartian Literature in English 87 



Character-forming is the end of education ; every subject in 
the time table must be challenged as to its power of helping to 
worthy living. " We acknowledge the final supremacy of the 
ethical ideal." Technological subjects may be admitted into 
the upper classes of the school, but the teaching of them must 
be distinguished from education proper. Currency arithmetic 
should be excluded except from upper classes. The school must 
no longer be subjected to the " vulgar ideals of the nineteenth 
century ". Surely this is the voice of Herbart ! 

Dr. Findlay is a humanist, though other claims than those of 
humanism are recognised. For each month or six weeks we 
should select "some central theme of great humanistic interest" 
capable of easy correlation with other groups. He approves of 
fairy tales for the young, but prefers to regard them as luxury 
rather than as staple food. 

Two doctrines, each of enormous educational importance, stand 
out clearly in Dr. Findlay's book, the two doctrines upon which 
Dorpfeld laid stress. Our writer is under no obligations to 
the Y/estphalian schoolmaster, but he has arrived at the same 
results. 

The first doctrine is that the conferring of skill or dexterity 
(e.g., in language, in writing, etc.) obeys a different set of educa- 
tional laws than the conferring of knowledge ; the " formal 
steps," which are valuable in the latter procedure, are inapplic- 
able to the former. " The chief error of the strict Herbartians 
seems to lie in their attempt to regard the Arts as subservient to 
the same laws of method which apply to branches of knowledge. 
Music, Drawing, Eeading are all brought by Ziller and Eein 
under the scheme of the Five Steps." " While in Instruction 
we proceed from sense-observation to perception and conception, 
in Performance we proceed from sense observation or (to use a 
more convenient term) from contemplation to active imitation." 
But for their proper task, the conferring of knowledge, the five 
steps are admirable, though they have their dangers ; " the 
followers of Herbart in Germany have here achieved results 
which cannot be assailed except on minor points ". Dr. Findlay's 
account of the steps is one of the clearest and most judicial in 



88 The Critics of Herbartianism 

the English language ; he summarises them thus : " first ob- 
servation, then varied observation, comparison with earlier 
observation, and finally — as the crown and completion of these 
particular experiences — the new, higher form of thought ". He 
conveniently uses the word " Section " as equivalent to the 
German " method-unit ". 

The second doctrine which is prominent in Dr. Findlay's book 
is that the " knowledge " subjects, being those that awaken the 
keenest interest and build up the " circle of thought " (all action 
springs out of this " circle "), must be more central in the cur- 
riculum than formal subjects and dexterities. This was precisely 
the contention of Dorpfeld, 1 and Dr. Findlay works it out in 
a more systematic way than has ever yet been attempted in 
English. There must be a worthy " content " to our studies, 
worthy and rich ideas. Mere mental gymnastic is of little use 
unless employed upon such a worthy " content ". 

The following quotations will illustrate Dr. Findlay's view on 
this question : — 

" Cleverness and skill in the forms of Art degrade the worker 
unless his mind and heart are filled with worthy ' content ' asso- 
ciated with those ' forms '." If there is anything worthy of study 
in the life and literature of the French people let us learn 
French ; if there is nothing worthy we might as well learn 
Fiji ; the latter would be as much a gymnastic as French. 
" The subject-matter of language teaching must be derived 
from the topics familiar to the child's circle of ideas," e.g., the 
Humanities and the Occupations ; ' ' the advantage of cor- 
relation is obvious". Grammar, likewise, can scarcely claim 
independent treatment as an abstract science ; it is rather to 
be subordinated to practical language exercises ; it is a mistake 
to divorce it and panegyrise it as a mental gymnastic. Similarly 
philology must be subordinated to literature ; " the decay of 
the faculty-psychology has led to a distrust of language teach- 
ing as a special medium for mental discipline ". So with music, 
drawing, and other more or less "formal" subjects; unless 

1 Qrundlinien einer Theorie des Lehrplans, 



Herbartian Literature in English 89 

they are associated with a worthy subject-matter or " content " 
their value is slight. Dr. Findlay " distrusts the cultivation of 
any art merely for its own sake ". We must (in music) start 
with songs possessing a worthy content ; an interest in the 
technique of the art comes later. " The teacher of art must 
be permitted to take the child step by step through the exercises 
necessary to attain skill, but in the choice of models and of 
subjects he is bound to submit to the suggestions offered from 
the Humanities, the Occupations, Nature-study, etc., of the 
general syllabus." 

The above remarks are wholly in the spirit of Dorpfeld ; 
subjects which convey "ideas" must form the centre of the 
curriculum. Many of Dr. Findlay's other suggestions are in 
the direction of "concentration" or " correlation ". He is up 
in arms against any syllabus — overcrowded, as is usually the 
case — whose parts are scrappy and disconnected. " One lesson 
per week in Drawing or Science is bound to spell failure, especi- 
ally if these pursuits are conducted without relation to other 
studies." Isolated biographies are of little use. It is "hopeless" 
to teach the Bible, or anything else, in scraps. Geometrical 
Drawing is officially separated from theoretical Geometry ! 
Miscellaneous scrappy "Beaders" are rightly being discarded 
in favour of books called Historical, Geographical, or Science 
Eeaders, which correlate the acquirement of the art of reading 
with some other branch of study. " Concentration " will help 
the teacher in various ways, and conduce to that " unity of the 
pupil's life" which is the final goal of teaching. The teacher 
of science or history must not ignore such things as composi- 
tion. History and literature should be brought together and 
treated together ; they form the Humanities. Natural science 
depends partly for its success on being correlated with practical 
work in workshops. The educational value of practical pursuits 
is not sufficiently recognised ; " the elementary school of the 
nineteenth century has created a gulf between the pursuits of 
home and the pursuits of school which must somehow be 
bridged over ". Sloyd is now being adapted to the needs of the 
Physical Laboratory. 



90 The Critics of Herbartianism 

" We advocate the doctrine of Concentration as a practical and 
essential contribution to the theory of the curriculum." At least 
in the case of young children, "results are decisive enough to 
enable us to speak confidently of the advantages of a scheme of 
study which centres round one theme ". But for older children 
"the utmost we can do is to be prepared for such associations 
as present themselves — to put our mathematics, for example, on 
a basis of Physical Science, our Arts of Expression into rela- 
tionship with the Humanities, and our Arts of Eepresentation 
into relationship with the Humanities and with Nature Know- 
ledge '\ 1 Still " concentration " has its limits ; " some pursuits 
cannot by any ingenuity be brought into the " circle ". 

Dr. Findlay has been criticised for attacking the "frankly 
empirical" tone of most British works on education. But his 
standpoint is the inevitable one for any educationist influenced 
by Herbart. " We can only establish education as a profes- 
sional pursuit by devoting to its study the same elaborate care, 
the same spirit of devotion to our profession, as we witness in 
other callings which have won the confidence of the public." 
We must seek " a scientific basis for our work ". Every new 
course of study must present " a new scientific problem ". 
Difficult pupils should especially awaken in the professional 
teacher a sense of professional pride. " The/e is an immense 
field of exploration awaiting teachers who have a psychological 
equipment." 

School and Home Life. By F. G. Booper, M.A. (A. Brown & 

Sons.) 

Though the name of Herbart is scarcely mentioned once in 
this volume of high-toned essays, the ideas of Herbart and his 
followers are everywhere to the fore. One essay (" The Pot of 
Green Feathers ") is an exposition, carried out in a fresh and 
untechnical manner, of the doctrine of Apperception. Though 
the book makes " no claim for originality," it is stimulating and 
inspiring. 

1 This sentence, which summarises much of Dr. Findlay's book, is one of 
the most important in recent British educational literature. 



Herbartian Literature in English 91 



There are so few educationists who are in earnest over the 
moral aspects of education that Mr. Eooper's words — which 
remind us of Ziller's claim that many-sided Interest is " a pro- 
tection against passions " — are doubly welcome. " You want 
to combat drinking and gambling. . . . Many youths (though 
not all) may be induced to avoid such temptations ... if you 
only provide them with other occupations." Mr. Eooper, in 
this connection, sees much value in manual dexterities, but 
his argument is obviously applicable to the whole curriculum. 
"All teachers are missionaries by profession" is a bold state- 
ment, but Mr. Eooper makes it, and it illustrates the spirit of 
his book. 

Many of his best suggestions concern manual training, Sloyd, 
the kindergarten, etc. ; manual work he regards as a necessary 
part of the curriculum, not for technical, but for educational 
reasons. But Mr. Eooper remains essentially a humanist and 
an Herbartian. " I believe that an intelligent study of the Bible 
and Shakespeare, and of classical English writers, is incom- 
parably more important than . . . manual training." Only 
through literature can imagination and taste be developed. 
Cruelty is largely due to defective imagination. Children must 
be " assisted to admire heroism in all its forms ". Fairy tales, 
fables, allegories, etc., are therefore of immense value. " If 
any one thinks that it would be better if the child's mind could 
move only in the sphere of the exact, I would reply (1) that this 
does not seem to be nature's process ; (2) that looking to the 
mode of growth of the mind it does not seem even possible ; and 
(3) that if you try to keep the child's mind to exactness you 
may clip and pluck the wings of imagination. Now without 
imagination there is little advance in knowledge, little discovery 
in the sphere of morality." But no " treatise on elementary 
ethics " is advisable for schools. 

Mr. Eooper's Herbartianism is still more obvious in his 
suggestions for concentration or correlation. Dislocation in 
one's thought-masses results in inconsistencies of character ; 
the child does not grow up " a single self " ; "a man may become 
like a musical box which can play two quite different tunes ". 



92 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Isolated thoughts are powerless ; apperception must take place 
before thoughts can rouse interest or exert influence. " The 
main fault of the present routine in Standards I. and II. is the 
isolated way in which each subject is treated." The teacher 
must " find ways of connecting together, not merely the parts 
of one study, but different studies with each other ". The 
science of number must be kept in close connection with natural 
history, history, geography, and even stories dealing with family 
life ; the intelligent apprehension of number has been hindered 
by the isolation of its study, an isolation which was opposed 
by Frobei's system. Early reading lessons should be based on 
object lessons rather than on " readers ". Object teaching, 
language teaching, drawing, and modelling should be mutually 
connected. Beading, writing, and speaking should similarly be 
interwoven. Songs should be connected with children's studies 
and occupations. Natural science, philology and art should be 
treated as one subject for young children. Art and literature 
should illustrate each other, e.g., a picture may serve to con- 
centrate a number of studies. Studies in natural history should 
contain conduct lessons. The motto for evening schools should 
be, " Concentrate your studies, group your instruction round 
one central subject ". 

Not mere external "discipline" or "training" will make a 
perfect man. Like every Herbartian, Mr. Eooper lays stress 
on moral insight and therefore on instruction. " Good habits 
are not by themselves a complete education." His own scheme 
of " concentration " would " tend to humanise children ". What 
studies are pre-eminently character-forming? Not the three E's; 
they cannot be regarded as the essence of elementary education, 
and indeed they can be better taught if the curriculum is not 
confined to them. "For the three E's, I substitute Nature and 
Human Nature as the epitome of educational studies. Of these 
twins neither should be neglected, although the latter is the 
more important." Pupils must be made acquainted " through 
literary studies with the best side of human nature ". Stories 
from Grimm, stories from history, and so forth, are of supreme 
character-forming importance. 



Herbartian Literature in English 93 

The value of formal grammar is not great ; even as a guide 
to speech it leads astray as often as it helps. But practice 
in actual composition is immensely important. 

In the important essay, " Drawing in Evening Schools " 
(based partly on the researches of M. Passy), Mr. Eooper 
traces out the bearings of apperception upon elementary draw- 
ing, and shows how easily the senses are misled when a draw- 
ing " type " pre-exists in the mind. 

Mr. Eooper, in all the above suggestions, is in full conformity 
with Herbartianism. His conformity is less when he bestows 
genuine though not lavish praise upon the classical curriculum 
of public schools. " The teacher (in such schools) mistrusts the 
growth of a receptive attitude in his class." Composing in Greek 
or Latin encourages independent mental activity. It is a mis- 
take for the teacher to make the lesson too easy. [Herbart 
himself would agree with this, though some modern Herbar- 
tians tend towards " soft pedagogy ".] Mr. Eooper is, however, 
strictly Herbartian when he points out that " feelings are 
linked together, not directly, but through the mediation of 
thought," words which remind us of the dictum that " action 
springs out of the circle of thought ". 

Every Herbartian boasts proudly of being " scientific " ; he 
is no despiser of " theory," no worshipper of " common-sense '. 
Nor is Mr. Eooper. " Common-sense is not the ordinary judg- 
ment which every one possesses, but the rare judgment of which 
every one approves." " I believe that the studies of German 
writers on education help to solve such (educational) mysteries; " 
there exists " an inexhaustible gold mine of educational philo- 
sophy " for those who choose to burrow into it. 

Introduction to the Herbartian Principles of Teaching. By 
Catherine I. Dodd. (Sonnenschein.) 

Miss Dodd sees how disastrously un-educative (i.e., non-forma- 
tive of character) most of our schools are, and enthusiastically 
advocates reform along Zillerian lines. 

The book possesses one defect. The authoress too closely 
identifies the Herbartian movement with the narrower Zillerian 



94 The Critics of He?-bartianism 

movement ; Herbart is described as an advocate of the " culture 
epochs " doctrine (which, except to a limited extent, he scarcely 
was ; in fact his presentational psychology was out of sympathy 
with a doctrine essentially one of heredity); "the Herbartians " 
(instead of "some Herbartians") are said to "place history as 
the centre of all the subjects to be studied ". Except for this 
defect — due to the fact that great Herbartians like Dorpfeld 
have not yet attracted the attention of British authors to the 
extent that Ziller has — Miss Dodd's book is admirable, and 
immensely more inspiring and suggestive than the " school- 
management " books studied by most teachers. 

The great feature of the work is the strong case it presents 
for the teaching of fairy-tales, history, and literature ; in fact for 
the Gesinnungs-unterricht of the Zillerians. " True history 
teaching should place before all the children in the country 
noble and great men, and so help to raise them to a higher moral 
level. ... If striking examples of goodness, courage, truth, 
and falsehood from the pages of the Bible or profane history are 
put before children they form their own moral judgments 
very readily. . . . Our Arthur, Alfred, Richard the Lion-hearted, 
and Cranmer might become part of the life of every English 
child if we gave history the position it merits in our primary 
schools." 

She recommends the use, when possible, of original historical 
sources ; the giving of some definite ideas concerning general 
historical sequence ; and also the touching, lightly but really, 
upon the history of other countries than our own. "With history 
goes literature. " The reading of literature in school has a high 
moral influence," and yet " rarely do children acquire either 
the power of reading aloud intelligently or a taste for good 
literature ". 

Great stress is, of course, laid upon " concentration," inter- 
preted along Zillerian lines. Isolation and scrappiness are the 
bane of biblical and similar teaching. Miss Dodd's detailed 
suggestions for " concentration " in the lower classes are excel- 
lent; Robinson Crusoe, the^ story of the Armada, are to form 
centres for the attachment of various material. But why "con- 



Herbartian Literature in English 95 

centrate"? One readily sees various advantages; interest is 
increased, not merely transitory interest, but true permanent 
interest ; memory is strengthened, and a logical memory is 
developed; the pressure of an overwhelming number of sub- 
jects is taken off the time-table. Concentration will help us 
to proportion our subjects according to natural relationships 
existing between them, and to get rid of quantities of irrele- 
vant subject-matter which text-books are constantly offering. 
" Isolated ideas are feebly impressed and easily forgotten." 

The " culture-stages " doctrine is advocated ; " children are 
psychically nearer to remote ages than to the present ". Like 
every Herbartian, Miss Dodd also attacks the exaggerated im- 
portance often given to " formal studies ". " They are only 
means to an end." " We read because we want to get at 
ideas." 

Nature Studies and Fairy-Tales. By Catherine I. Dodd. 

(Nelson.) 

Miss Dodd is the best English writer on the fairy-tale ques- 
tion, and her suggestions relative to the employment of such 
tales, together with nursery rhymes, Greek legends, and similar 
matter, would have been referred to in connection with her 
Introduction, except that in the present work she has dealt 
much more fully with the question. There can be no doubt 
as to the excellence of the scheme she has worked out for the 
lower classes of schools Fairy-tales offer so many points of 
contact with " nature " that there is every reason for combining 
their study with the study of nature, in other words, of apply- 
ing here the principle of " concentration ". Drawing and 
plaster work are also suggested as further applications of the 
concentration principle. 

The book contains a whole series of lessons and suggestions 
which will prove of great value to the teacher of junior classes, 
while for educationists in general Miss Dodd's lengthy and able 
defence of the use of fairy-tales, and her history of the fairy-tale 
question cannot fail to be of interest. She makes use of the 
" five steps " of Herbart and Ziller. 



9 6 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Interest and Education. By Charles de Garmo. (The Mac- 
millan Company.) 

This book marks an advance from what may be called the 
primitive Interest doctrine, which ignores, or passes lightly 
over, the innate outward-going tendencies of the child, to the 
more advanced form of the doctrine, which eagerly avails itself 
of these tendencies. The work thus represents a kind of 
synthesis of Herbartianism with Frobelianism, and also, be 
it added, with the " heuristic " doctrine, and with Spencer's 
doctrine of the primary importance of life-preserving studies. 
In fact the Herbartianism of the book is observable mainly or 
solely in the emphasis on Interest. 

This " Interest " is to be a form of " self-expression ". " This 
mental activity, taking root first in the instincts and impulses 
of the physical nature, and developing into conscious desire for 
the realisation of certain ends, is at bottom nothing but the 
effort to express self in accordance with the varying ideals im- 
planted by physical nature, or developed by growing insight into 
the ideal nature of the man." " Interest is a feeling that accom- 
panies the idea of self-expression. ... It has its primary root 
in inherited impulse." 

Great stress is laid on the active side of mental life. " Our 
greatest lack ... is the meagreness of opportunity for vigorous 
outgoing motor expression." The writer is in one place grimly 
humorous. "It is some comfort to the teacher to know that 
... he cannot wholly spoil a thoroughly active mind, or en- 
tirely counteract the influence of the outside world of achieve- 
ment. Yet our school education should be of a character actively 
to promote the qualities that lead to survival." " Education has 
to give permanent and strong interests in the realities of life." 

The view that lays stress on self-expression corrects two 
opposite errors, (1) the theory of effort, " that the sheer dead 
lift of will is the only sure means of getting the child to the goal 
and the only way whereby his mind can be trained to do the 
hard things that are sure to confront him in later life " ; (2) the 
method of coaxing by means of pleasurable excitations. 

The " heuristic" element in Dr. de Garmo's book is seen in 



Herbartian Literature in English 97 

combination with the Interest doctrine. " As soon as school 
work assumes the form of problems to be solved by the self- 
activity of the pupils, we have at once a concrete application of 
the doctrine of interest." But the school has not to engage in 
" mere shadow or imitation discoveries ". 

Notes of Lessons on the Herbartian Method. (Based on Her- 
bart's Plan.) By M. Fennel and Members of a Teaching 
Staff. (Longmans.) 

. It is painful to have to criticise this book. Except for a brief 
preface, to the correctness of which no exception can be taken, 
the book contains scarcely a trace of Herbartianism from begin- 
ning to end. The ", five steps" employed by the "teaching 
staff" are, for the most part, not Herbartian steps at all. " Ee- 
capitulation," here given as the "fifth step," is not recognised as 
one at all by the Herbartians ; a " step " implies progress, not 
movement over the same ground. Again, Ziller's doctrine that 
the aim of the lesson should be clearly stated to the class at 
or near the beginning of the lesson, is apparently misunderstood 
by the authors, though a saving clause has been introduced into 
the preface. Thus we find as the aim of the first lesson in the 
volume, "To exercise imagination of class and lead them to 
know the origin of English Prose and Poetry ". Conceive of a 
Zillerian saying to his pupils : " Now children, the aim of this 
lesson is to exercise your imagination I " In a so-called " object 
lesson " on a horse (the lesson should really be called an " in- 
formation lesson," for the object is only shown in a picture) the 
" application " (step four) consists of such mere information as 
that when alive the horse is the chief beast of burden in temper- 
ate climates. This may be an " application " of the horse, but it 
is not an " application " of the knowledge acquired in a lesson ; 
in short, the writer wholly fails to grasp the meaning of " appli- 
cation " in the Herbartian system. 

Clearly Herbartianism, like Frobelianism, will have to be 
saved from those supposed friends, who, with inadequate know- 
ledge of its principles, seek to guide others in the application 
of them. 



PART IV. 

THE CRITICS OF HERBARTIANISM. 

SECTION I. 

DITTES. 
(1884-86.) 

References. 
Dittes. Padagogium, 1884, p. 296. 

1885, pp. 437, 505, 573, 637. 

1886, pp. 500, 580. 

Just. Jahrbuch des Vereins filr wissenschaftliche Padagogik, 1886, p. 
212. 

Glockner. Padagogische Studien, 1886, p. 193. 1 

Thilo and Flugel. Dittes ilber die praktische und theoretische Philosophie 
Herbarts (Beyer, Langensalza). 

In the history of the Herbartian question the Dittes controversy 
is one of first importance in view of its magnitude and virulence. 
It sprang up during the two or three critical years when from 
almost every side fierce attacks came in, and when the two 
leaders of the movement, Stoy and Ziller, could no longer 
engage in the task of defence. Herbartianism, moreover, was 
torn by internal discord. Men like Frohlich and Sallwiirk had 
apostatized from Zillerianism ; Stoy, before his death, had 
definitely broken with the extremists, and these, in response, 

1 In this same number is an article, entitled, " Dr. Dittes as Director of 
the Vienna Padagogium," intended to show that Dittes was a man " without 
character, without conscience, and without fidelity to duty ". 



Dittes 99 

had developed an acerbity and touchiness which were excep- 
tional even in the painful annals of German controversies. The 
criticisms offered by Dittes were studiously moderate in tone ; 
the retorts of his antagonists were the opposite. He was guilty 
of " crafty mendacity " and unintelligence, and deserved to have 
his journal confiscated for its " radical" tendencies. Dittes, it 
should be remarked, was a prominent Vienna educationist. 

The first article in Pddagogium (1884) was a review of the 
work of the ex-Zillerian Frohlich. " Where," asks Dittes, " is 
this boasted ' scientific pedagogy ' about which even its adherents 
quarrel ? It seems like the machine of which some one said, 
' It is very good, and has only one defect, that it doesn't work '." 

The 1885 articles were more important. 

Beginning with Herbart's psychology, Dittes shows that the 
doctrine of "reals," according to which the soul is absolutely 
simple, devoid of faculties, etc., is quite useless. In fact, the 
metaphysical doctrine of Being is a fatal stumbling-block to 
Herbart's system. He constantly oscillates between appearance 
or happening and real Being. Ordinary mental processes are 
mere appearance ; the " real " soul is already " ripe " and in- 
capable of development. Herbart cannot deny experience, but 
he reduces it to a fiction. 1 Eeal knowledge lies beyond man's 
grasp. 

Dittes then reviews Herbart's ethics, dealing successively 
with his emphasis on the " aesthetic judgment," with the 
avowed absence of a single unifying idea, 2 and with the 
inability of the ethics to give practical guidance. He then 
proceeds to criticise the " five moral ideas ". Logically, Her- 



1 One must omit most of the metaphysical discussion. Dittes' result is 
probably correct. Herbart here appears as a Kantian. But still we can learn 
much from the phenomenological side of his work. 

2 Herbart expressly warned men against trying to make ethics into a 
sham unity. Our judgments are disparate and must remain so. But 
Thilo contends that Herbart's ethics really has a unity, inasmuch as it 
is based on the aesthetic judgment passed on will-relations. All harmony 
rests on diversity. 



ioo The Critics of Herbartianism 

bart's system of ideas suffers from the defect that the first 
(Inner Freedom) stands for a relation of Will to Insight, not 
of Will to Will. The real content of morality is given by the 
other four, and we cannot get a fifth idea out of the relation 
of the Will to these four. Thus, the first idea is not co-ordinate 
with the others. 

Idea of Perfection. 1 — Unless a Will be morally good, its 
Perfection (in Herbart's sense), that is its Intensity, Extensity, 
and Concentration, arouses no approval. We do not praise a 
strong-minded robber. Herbart's second idea stands rather for 
physical and intellectual than for moral eminence. 2 

Idea of Benevolence. — But why should my Will devote itself 
to the Will of another person ? Surely only on the ground of 
welfare ? Am I to support the will of a robber ? 

Idea of Bight or Law. — " Strife displeases." Does it always ? 
May I not rightly strive to save something imperilled ? Were 
prophets and reformers wrong in stirring up strife? Must an 
assaulted person do nothing? 3 Significant that when Herbart's 
countrymen were struggling against Napoleon, he himself re- 
mained in his empty Konigsberg classroom. He was consistent 
with his doctrine that " strife displeases " ! His fourth idea is 
too rigid. We must not forbid strife altogether. 



1 Better, " Breadth and efficiency of Will ". The word " Perfection " 
scarcely suggests Herbart's meaning. 

2 This raises a vastly important point. Herbart regarded each of his 
five ideas as unmoral when taken alone, in abstraction. He explicitly says 
(Lectures, § 17) that the second idea is not in itself adequate to determine 
virtue, " for that can never be done by any one practical idea alone ". 
But Herbart regarded strength and breadth of character as a vital element 
in the complete moral life. Here comes in his stress on many-sided 
Interest, a notion closely related to the second moral idea. We do not 
value hardness in a diamond if the latter be devoid of brilliance. But 
each quality is valuable in the other's company. So with Buskin's Ideas 
of Belation, Ideas of Power, etc. Abstraction is not separation. Thus 
the objection of Dittes has been anticipated. The same kind of answer 
is to be made in connection with the Idea of Benevolence. 

3 Again the same answer. There are five ideas ; any one is an ab- 
straction. 



Dittes 101 

Idea of Equity or Fairness. — Is it true that every deed, good 
or bad, must be recompensed after its kind ? Does an un- 
compensated good deed displease ? Surely not ! It shines 
with an added brilliancy. Again, evil deeds do not displease 
because unrequited, but because evil. One evil deed recom- 
pensed by another ! Herbart himself admitted that the difficult 
idea of Equity may conflict with that of Benevolence. 1 

Again, can " Taste" be a sure foundation for morality? 2 
Surely one person's "Taste" may conflict with another's! 
Have the ideas any force ? No, they are powerless, as indeed 
is Herbart' s entire system of Ethics, which is " devoid of every 
trace of heroism and energy". 3 

Then, as to Herbart's pedagogy ; does this rest securely, as 
he says, on his ethics and psychology ? In point of fact his 
psychology gives us only a presentation-mechanism which 
awakens nothing but horror and which excludes soul-life and 
real development. The "soul" itself remains stiff and im- 
potent. Herbart's ethics likewise give us nothing to aim at. 
The moral ideas, as already said, have no force. 

Again, the distinction of Begierung from Zucht is of dubious 
validity. The former appears almost as a stranger living at the 
cost of its two companions, Zucht and Unterricht. Begierung 
is said to care only for the present while Zucht cares for the 
future — surely an unnecessary distinction, for all Education 
must look after both present and future. If Eegierung is 
un educative why mention it ? 4 

1 The fifth idea is certainly a difficult one, but yet it seems to exist. 
What else do we mean by approving of Gratitude and (as Butler did) of 
Resentment ? Let us remember again the abstractness of Herbart's ideas ; 
they are not to be taught as such to children. 

2 Herbart merely means "immediate Intuition". The ideas are not 
products of reasoning. They are based on "insight". 

s Surely it is important to apprehend the moral law, though it is equally 
important for our inclinations and habits to conform to it (Lectures, § 9). 

4 The reply of Just is conclusive. Herbart's distinctions are useful to 
be known, but need not be carried as such into practice. Herbart's 
classification shows the educator where the needs lie, and prevents the 
errors which spring from mental confusion. A "good disciplinarian" is 



102 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Herbart came nearest to the true view when he said that the 
Idea of Perfection suggested soundness of body and mind, a 
"coming to the full " of a child's powers. Why did he not 
follow out this Pestalozzian concept, "the harmonious develop- 
ment of all powers"? Herbart answers that the second idea 
does not stand for the whole of Virtue. The reason is that he 
has narrowed it down. 

He lived remote from the world and did not know children, 
hence his error that Virtue is the only end of Education; hence 
also his dragging in of aesthetic and religious culture under 
11 Interest "; likewise his reduction of Feeling and Will to pre- 
sentations, and his superficial treatment of the culture of the 
dispositions and of the body. We cannot say he actually forgot 
any of the chief ends of Education, but his subordination of 
them to Virtue made their treatment irrational. 1 

Herbart's psychology excluded any sensible survey of mental 
life. Facts like race, nationality, and sex were ignored. 

He laid great stress on Virtue as the end of Education. But 
has he, with all his stress on " educative Instruction," shown 
us the path to Virtue ? No ; towards the end of his life his 
confidence in Instruction grew faint. It is necessary, he tells 
us, that what is learnt be felt. Individual differences may 
hamper our task ; the things learnt may be forgotten ; the 
environment may corrupt, and all our precautions be in vain. 2 

not necessarily a good educator. Herbart expressly says : " In practice, 
Regierung and Zucht combine " (Lectures, § 42). 

1 Just retorts that when Dittes divides Education into aesthetic, moral, 
etc., he is really assuming separate faculties and separate exercises for 
each faculty. But this gets rid of all unity in Education, and may even 
result in a conflict of studies, and the creation of distinct " circles of 
thought ". Moreover such a division encourages Egoism ; Intellect would 
be encouraged apart from Morality. [There is truth on both sides. Certain 
practical distinctions must be made ; but still the Herbartian doctrine is 
useful as laying stress on the unity of all education. It is a great mistake 
to isolate different departments, e.g., "sacred " subjects. Let us have one 
" circle of thought " if possible.] 

2 That Herbart became less enthusiastic towards the end of his life was 
not surprising. We must remember that the General Pedagogy was a 



Dittes 103 

His original view of moral Education was spoilt by his per- 
verted notion of the origin of the Will ; he overestimates the 
value of intellectual culture and therefore of Instruction. 

What a heterogeneous mass of conceptions he gives us ! He 
tells us that the teacher must bring singly to actuality the two 
members of Inner Freedom (Insight and Will) ; then the two 
must be connected. Then, as a fourth step, Effort is to actualise 
morality permanently. As further factors come inclinations 
and habits. 1 

At one moment we hear of "many-sided Interest" as the 
goal, at another of "Perfection". 2 Good maxims are said to 
come from the aesthetic judgment, but this, on its part, only 
works powerfully when woven into the total Interest. 

Whence come the five moral ideas ? Herbart says the soul 
is absolutely simple, even without faculties ; how then can it 
give rise to these ideas ? Are they their own father ? And how 
can they fuse to a unity ? 3 

Herbart speaks of children passing judgments on others 



juvenile book. Glockner retorts on Dittes that though Herbart may have 
come to admit the feeble influence of Instruction, he equally emphasised 
the weak influence of Zucht or Training ; and he never denied that the 
Will was rooted in the circle of thought. 

1 Just replies that Dittes is again regarding distinctions drawn for clear- 
ness' sake as separate stages. Moral Insight is not formed apart from Feel- 
ing, and this is brought about by the observation of images of human action. 
The sesthetic judgment is not cold, but involves a feeling of sympathy 
with the perceived acts. All the several tasks of moral Education really 
go on side by side. Attempt and Action give rise to Will, and this renders 
Training necessary. [Herbart expressly says, " We can seldom wait for 
the development of the sesthetic judgment"; Lectures, § 27. Dittes has 
here again, as in his criticisms of the Moral Ideas and of Eegierung and 
Zucht, regarded abstract distinctions as separate stages, quite contrary to 
Herbart's intention.] 

2 The second moral idea is undoubtedly connected closely with many- 
sided Interest. But Glockner rightly replies that Herbart never put for- 
ward either of these notions as the complete goal of Education. 

3 Glockner replies, " The ideas arise along with their objects. Every re- 
action must be different for each different experience. If the soul were 
not simple we might then rightly ask, ' Whence the fusion ? ' " 



io4 The Critics of Herbartianism 

before themselves — -thus, of judgment apart from moral dis- 
position. But the writer has never seen such a naked judgment 
in children. 1 

The moral ideas, Herbart tells us, are without force. If so, 
whence comes the motive force? By the ideas becoming 
involved in Interest, we are told ; Training must be connected 
with Instruction. But yet Herbart constantly tells us that 
the Will is rooted in presentations ; so whence comes the real 
and original spring of the moral life ? Even Interest (rooted 
in presentations) cannot yield it. His doctrine is false to facts 
and also to Christianity, which says that action springs from the 
heart, not from the circle of thought. 2 

The presentational doctrine is false. A child has numberless 
pleasures, pains, desires, etc., before presentations. 3 Again Effort 
is not always directed to the freeing of checked presentations ; 
on the contrary, it often aims at freeing from some disagreeable 
presentation. 

Herbart's whole scheme of mental statics and dynamics is 
false, and, therefore, his scheme of " educative Instruction " is 
false also. Character-strength, with him, rests on " great masses 
of thought-material which work a deep resultant feeling ". Chris- 
tianity says, " Blessed are the poor in spirit " ! A poor peasant 
wife may have a finer character than the most learned professor. 4 
Alas for men if the most precious of things is dependent upon 
deep thought ! Again, it is not true that opposed presentations 
always darken and check each other ; they often clarify each other. 

The longer Herbart lived the more he came to see that other 

2 Just retorts, "Then Dittes must know children very badly. Any 
mother or teacher will confirm Herbart." [But Dittes probably means, 
"Will the judgments spring up spontaneously?"] 

2 Dittes' criticism is here probably sound. If we accept pure presenta- 
tionalism and deny any original tendency to act we cannot explain volition. 
But see Introduction, pp. 30-1. 

3 Glockner, following Herbart, answers that a feeling may be presenta- 
tional at basis, i.e., due to a multitude of obscure stimuli. [But no one can 
prove this.] 

4 Glockner politely replies that even the Devil can quote texts for his 
purpose. A "learned professor" may be "poor in spirit". 



Dittes 105 

agencies besides Instruction were of moral value ; hobbies, home 
training, habituation, etc. 1 But though Herbart's views became 
more sound, he never abandoned the doctrine that punishments 
and rewards, which imitate nature, do not serve for moral 
bettering. 2 

Herbart is also unfortunate with his " Interest " doctrine. 
He rightly says, " Interest is self-activity," but he ought to 
distinguish its two elements : (a) activity ; (b) satisfaction. His 
classification of Interests is also illogical. He mixes up forms of 
Interest (Empirical, Speculative, Contemplative) with contents of 
Interest (objects of experience, etc.). Above all he never tells 
us the real origin of Interest ; his psychology prevents him. 
Was there, or was there not, a germ of Interest before the 
objects of Interest came to be known ? 

Reform of Herbart's Interest Doctrine. — We can classify In- 
terests, says Dittes, according to either form or matter. Form- 
ally we should have Empirical, Speculative, Contemplative, 
Mnemonic, Productive, etc. Herbart himself has mentioned 
a Systematic and a Methodic Interest. We could also speak 
of an Analytic and a Synthetic Interest. According to Matter 
or Content we could classify Interest as ^Esthetic, Eeligious, 
Historic, Agricultural, Practical, Scientific, etc. There is also 
Personal Interest (in health, etc.). 

Herbart was not the discoverer of the Interest doctrine. 
Comenius, Pestalozzi, Niemeyer and others had anticipated 
him. Thus Niemeyer urged teachers to excite indwelling 
forces. But these men rightly regarded Interest as depending 
on a spontaneous force of the mind, as the development of a 
natural germ. Herbart's special mechanism does not really 
explain Interest at all. 

He makes good remarks on Attention and Apperception. 
This is the best part of his work. But Comenius long ago 

1 Such things, says Glockner, come under Zucht and Regierung. Her- 
bart never discounted them. 

2 Nor do they, says Glockner. They serve to warn and admonish, but 
equally well bad men and good. [Herbart is here in opposition to the 
doctrine of " natural punishments " advocated by Spencer and others.] 



106 The Critics of Herbartianisnt 

had urged that all Instruction should conform naturally to 
the pupil's standpoint. Even Herbart's best work is injured 
by perversions and exaggerations, which mostly arise out of 
his false mechanical view of presentations. 

In the scheme of " Formal Steps " the terms " System " and 
"Method" are ill chosen; and the terms "Analysis" and 
" Synthesis " are used waveringly. The Herbartian pedagogy 
not only rests on untenable foundations, and is a failure in its 
outlines, but it is also extremely deficient, obscure, and con- 
fused in its definitions and terminology. Its originality consists 
mainly in its unsuccessful elucidations of old thoughts, and in 
the introduction of new names and classifications which, for the 
most part, are badly brought forward, have no value, scientific 
or practical, and are also precisely adapted to cause a complete 
confusion of concepts and language. The terminology would 
prevent any communication with parents, boards of managers, 
etc. 

Herbart's suggestions for dealing with classics, mathematics, 
and geography (e.g., his recommendation to connect this last 
one with other subjects) are good. But he has not dealt with 
modern languages, drawing, and singing. His remarks on 
religious Instruction are obscure. Virtually he hands the sub- 
ject over to the theologians. Its culmination, he says, lies in 
Confirmation (accompanied by a special confession) and the 
Holy Communion (a sign of general brotherhood). He recom- 
mends Plato's Krito and Apology for strengthening religious im- 
pressions. (What will religious people say ?) He says nothing 
of fairy tales, neither does he tell us whether schools should 
be sectarian, unsectarian, or governmental. At times he says 
some hard things about Church arrogance, but he finally leaves 
the Church in an almost impregnable position. His metaphysic 
is really incompatible with Eeligion, hence he bases religion 
merely on practical needs, e.g., the need to keep the mind 
humble. 1 

1 Glockner shows, by quotations, that Herbart's piety was warm and 
sincere. 



Wesendonck 107 



SECTION II. 

WESENDONCK. 
(1885.) 

Reference. 

Wesendonck. Die Schule Herbart-Ziller und Hue Jilnger vor dem Forum 
der Kritik. Pichlers Witwe und Sohn, Vienna and Leipzig, 1885. 

The above work is, in part, a critique of Herbartian and 
Zillerian (chiefly the latter) ideas, but its main interest lies in 
its scathing exposure of the controversial methods of the 
Zillerians. The author shows that, with all their zeal and 
merits, these men have very bad manners. Among other things, 
they accuse their opponents of being "vulgar pedagogues," 
"mere practitioners," "ignoramuses," "nullities," " people to 
whom pedagogy is an El Dorado of dilettantism," and " people 
whose mental horizon ends with their noses ". 

Wesendonck commences with an historical survey of the 
Herbartian movement, dealing in some detail with the work 
of Stoy and Ziller. He criticises Ziller as follows : — 

He was not devoid of merits. He had much knowledge, 
much boldness, and a warm love for man. But he did not 
know the capacities of the average child, nor the distinction 
between the desirable and the attainable. That is to say, he 
was unpractical, and must therefore not be accepted as a pope. 

When he approved of putting the whole Bible into the 
hands of children he was wrong ; many parts are unsuitable, 
indeed unreadable. 

His proposal to make the elementary schools schools for the 
poor only, was thoroughly bad. It would degrade these schools, 
and generate pride, envy, etc. Separate schools for different 
ranks would be not only unadvisable, but far too expensive for 
any State. Still special schools for neglected or peculiar children 
are useful. 

His condemnation of French as an uneducative language is 



io8 The Critics of Herbartianism 



unjust. Ziller was prejudiced against modern languages and 
only approved of giving a smattering of them for practical 
purposes, e.g., to future merchants. If such languages are to 
be postponed to the University stage they will never be learnt 
properly. 

He rightly demands that Syntax be learnt inductively during 
the course of reading, but he is wrong in demanding the same 
for Etymology. Surely, to learn the conjugations, etc., in this 
way would be wearisome and distracting. What a vast amount 
of reading would be necessary, and how insecure the knowledge 
would be ! The first thing should be a rapid glance at the 
conjugations, then reading. Herbart was here more sound 
than Ziller. 

The Zillerian curriculum is overcrowded, including such 
things as reading foreign handwriting. In higher schools 
musical and theatrical exhibitions are to take place. But 
where are the buildings, utensils, etc., to be obtained ? "Who is 
to bear the expense ? Ziller recommends that in the accessory 
classes of upper schools medicine should be taught to future 
physicians, Hebrew to future theologians, etc. But surely a 
school should be on general lines ; pupils may not yet know their 
future calling. Science would do the theologians more good. 1 

Ziller expected vast knowledge from his teachers, e.g., know- 
ledge of foreign forms of speech (and even their constituents) 
which have been introduced into the vernacular. 

He objects to a merely "popular" style of teaching. But 
many subjects must be taught "popularly" or not at all. 
Teachers would have to live to the age of Methuselah to satisfy 
Ziller's demands. 

Ziller 's " concentration " plan would really lead to a breaking- 
up of connected matter. The pupil would only acquire scrappy 

1 Ziller is often attacked from two sides. Some critics contend that a 
school should " prepare for life ; " these protest against his claim that 
schools should " educate," i.e., form character. Others protest against his 
admission of professional subjects in upper classes. The two objections 
neutralise each other. Ziller was right in laying the main stress on " Edu- 
cation," but he made quite sufficient concessions to utilitarian demands. 



Wesendonck 109 



knowledge, not connected views of a subject. Only the " con- 
centration " material at the centre will get justice, and children 
will even get tired of this owing to its constant recurrence. 
To use the story of the " seven little goats " for purposes of 
arithmetic, geography, etc., is only to make children hate the 
story. Why, after all, this craving for " concentration " ? The 
child hears all kinds of matter and yet does not lose his 
personality. Besides, where is the "concentration" in using 
twelve fairy tales ? And is there any proof that this plan of 
" concentration " aids character ? 

The fairy tales are useful aids to imagination and feeling, but 
have little bearing on morality. They are partly survivals from 
pagan mythology, partly later in origin ; they certainly do not 
represent any one " culture epoch ". But even if they did, is 
it necessary to lead Christian children through heathen and 
Jewish stages? 1 

Some of the fables positively shock our moral or aesthetic 
feelings ; others appear silly even to the young ; in other cases 
the lessons deduced from them are beyond children's capacities, 
e.g., "Don't judge according to appearances". (How, then, is 
a child to judge ?) 

Again, as Frohlich has shown, the Eobinson Crusoe stage is 
not suitable for children of seven, for things like sea, ship- 
wreck, etc., are beyond them. The desire for travel comes 
about the age of twelve, and then the story has much value. 
But it represents a stage of culture far in advance of the patri- 
archal, and is also morally in advance of it. What folly, there- 
fore, to put it before the patriarchal period ! 

Whole stages are missing from Ziller's scheme, e.g., the pre- 
language stage, the stages of fetichism, 2 polytheism, etc. His 
scheme is not even orthodox ; where does the fall of man come 
in? The present-day stage is left out altogether, though the 



1 Yes, says (in effect) Dr. Stanley Hall. See p. 71. 

2 Dr. Stanley Hall in his daring contribution to Principles of Religious 
Education recommends " nature study " for Sunday Schools, as correspond- 
ing to the stage of fetichism in the race. 



no The Critics of Her bar danism 

most important of all. Is the boy of fourteen a man already ? 
Apparently so, if the eighth stage is the final one. 

Is the life of Jesus a "stage," properly speaking ? Is it to 
be " lived through " ? In any case its importance is under- 
estimated in the Zillerian scheme. Moreover the eighth stage 
(the Eeformation) is a stage of heresy for Catholics. 

In Ziller's plan there is an absence of recognition given to 
such principles as nationality, patriotism, the rights of man, the 
limitation of the absolute power of rulers, the extension of state 
power in the interests of members, tolerance, love of men in 
general. Ziller's selection of historical material is arbitrary. 

Again his distinction between "educative" and " uneduca- 
tive " instruction is artificial ; all material, properly handled, ought 
to be educative. There should be moral ideas in it all, though the 
pupils may not be conscious of them. 1 But some departments 
are better than others for moral purposes. History (religious 
and profane) is especially good, but fables (we have seen) are 
not so good as Ziller thinks them to be. 

His attempt to teach modern history contemporaneously 
with ancient is unpractical, and violates true concentration. No 
wonder some of his followers wish to teach history partly back- 
wards, partly forwards. 

Ziller sometimes appears like a theologian of the Middle Ages 
in his overvaluation of the Jews, Greeks, and Eomans, and in 
his admiration for Latin. 

Another defect of Herbartianism is its cumbrous terminology. 
Instead of " Eegierung " why not say "outer guidance"; in- 
stead of "Zucht," "inner guidance"? Moreover, the dis- 
tinction between these two and between them and Instruction 
was known long before Herbart. That Instruction should not 
only give knowledge but also form character is no new dis- 
covery. The whole Herbartian school suffers from verbosity 

1 This is nonsense. The only important moral part played by mathe- 
matics is that the study may possibly function as a life interest. But history 
deals with man as such. Ziller's distinction, though only a rough one, is 
quite justified. 



Wesendonck 1 1 1 



and arrogance. The reader of the writings of the Herbartians 
requires a special dictionary, and must discount their claims to 
be the only educationists. 

Generally it may be said that the Zillerians overestimate the 
value of Instruction, owing to their adherence to Herbart's 
presentational psychology. Parental love, family love, imita- 
tion, personality of the teacher, influence of companions and 
books, are far more influential. 

Still, the Herbart-Ziller system has certain excellences, among 
which may be mentioned (1) its insistence on many-sided 
Interest as contrasted with dry knowledge or skill, and on the 
rousing of involuntary attention ; (2) its insistence on the view 
that Instruction must be "educative" (i.e., from character); 
but supreme authority must not be given to any one kind of 
instruction-material ; (3) the apperception doctrine ; (4) the 
articulation of Instruction; here come in the "formal steps" 
which are useful but must not be slavishly followed ; moreover 
they are not exclusively Herbartian ; (5) Ziller's grand design 
of forming a teaching-plan, in place of a mere aggregate of 
studies ; he carried it to absurdities, but he deserves praise for 
aiming at it; (6) Ziller's recommendation of conversational 
rather than catechetical methods ; Dittes and others have, how- 
ever, made the same recommendation ; (7) Ziller's emphasis on 
the dignity of the educational calling. But he and many other 
Herbartians think too much of home education and regard 
schools mainly as auxiliary agents, though upon them he some- 
times puts too great demands. Moreover his thoughts were 
fixed too much on the upper classes of society. 

Wesendonck's work, as already said, is largely devoted to an 
exposure of the controversial methods of the Herbartians. Vogt, 
successor of Ziller, comes in for special castigation. Because 
Dittes had written a critique — one quite free from offensive 
personalities — Vogt must needs accuse him of "mendacity," 
"hostility to all science," "plagiarism," " impiousness," "party 
spirit," and so forth, and urges that the State should suppress 
all forms of " anarchism," such as those represented by the 



The Critics of Herbartianism 



" radicalism " of Dittes and his " terrorist " followers. Yet 
Vogt was head of a union aiming at " educative Instruction," 
i.e., Instruction that makes for character ! 



SECTION III. 

BARTELS. 

(1885.) 

Reference. 

Bartels. Die Amuendbarkeit der Herbart-Ziller-Stoy'schen didaktischen 

Grundsatze filr den Vnterricht in Volks- und Biirgerschulen. Wittenberg, 

1885, 1888. 

It was to Dr. Bartels, director of the "Biirgerschulen" of 
Gera, that Stoy sent the epigrammatic message which pro- 
claimed the breach between the moderate and the extreme (or 
Zillerian) followers of Herbart. " What is good in Ziller is not 
new, what is new is not good." 



Ziller' s doctrines (says Bartels) are defective on the practical 
side. Herbart himself had recognised the important part played 
by practice. Speculation and psychology are not the only things 
necessary for pedagogy. We may recognise Ziller's services, 
yet deny them to be very Titanic. 

The Herbartians build their system on ethics and psychology. 
This is good, but insufficient. Religion has independent worth 
and goes far beyond the " moral ideas ". Man has to be made 
into God's image ; he must be " saved " ; this is not the same 
as being fed with a number of Interests. Even Ziller, though 
going beyond Herbart in recognising the claims of religion, did 
not sufficiently emphasise the need of Christian faith. 

The defects of Herbart's psychology have been adequately 
exposed by Ostermann and others. Whatever Herbartians 
may say, the soul has faculties, and cannot be resolved into 
a presentation-mechanism. Attention cannot be explained on 
Herbart's theory ; though occasioned by presentations, it is 



B artels 1 1 3 



something more than they. Herbart's view results in an 
exaggeration of the power of education. 

"Educative Instruction." — The Herbartians lay great stress 
on this " Instruction which forms Character," and strongly 
condemn much Instruction and many Schools as really " un- 
educative". Very good! But Luther, Comenius, Locke, 
Pestalozzi, Niemeyer, Diesterweg had all urged that Instruc- 
tion should make for Character, and Diesterweg' s views were 
very similar, on this subject, to those of Herbart. 

" Schools do not Educate." — The old fashion was to give the 
" Three E's," plus religious Instruction in the form of indigest- 
ible biblical and catechetical material. Then science came to 
the front, and there occurred a heaping-up of new subjects — 
" didactic materialism " — but no principle of selection. Hence 
" Interest " was not aroused, for the material was not arranged 
in accordance with the child's natural capacities. But "Interest," 
say the Herbartians, is the one great essential ; it is an end, not 
a mere means ; self-activity must be roused. 

"Good," says the critic, "but not original." Pestalozzi, 
Niemeyer, Diesterweg saw this. Moreover, the Herbartians 
lay exaggerated stress on Instruction, and depreciate such 
influences as personality, family, and environment. 

" Culture stages." — Here the Zillerians go quite beyond Her- 
bart. Ziller claims that language shows that a similar develop- 
ment took place in race and in individual, and this is one of the 
supports of his doctrine. But does he ever really prove that the 
individual goes through the stages of the race ? Never ! Men 
like Frohlich claim that though there are analogies there is no 
real parallelism. Is it possible to believe that there are eight 
stages of racial development capable of being represented by 
the eight arbitrarily selected stages of a German elementary 
school ? Strange ! Dr. Staude, though a Zillerian, has ad- 
mitted that the stages of child development cannot be very 
exactly defined, and Sallwiirk has attacked Ziller' s plan at 
many points. He has asked, for example, whether the Protes- 
tant German Empire and the Lutheran catechism necessarily 
represent the highest hitherto attainable stages of human pro- 

8 



114 The Critics of Herbartianism 

gress. And is not a scheme seriously defective if it is only 
applicable to Protestant children ? 

Sallwurk's book created a sensation, and Eein, in his reply, 
had to modify his master's scheme, and lay stress on national 
rather than cosmopolitan " culture stages ". Dorpfeld likewise, 
though an Herbartian, has only accepted the " culture stages " 
doctrine on condition of its being combined with the ' ' concentric 
circles " plan. 

Let us consider Ziller's proposal to use fairy tales as the 
centre of the first year's instruction. These tales may be 
useful, but they cannot take the place of religious Instruction 
proper. They are imagination- and feeling -m&tevial, and work 
aesthetically, not morally. 1 Moreover, some of the objections 
to the biblical stories (e.g., that they represent sons who deceive 
their parents) hold good of certain fairy tales. Few of the tales 
recommended by Ziller have moral value ; some are positively 
pernicious, and represent wrong acts being rewarded. But how 
grandly reward and punishment are represented in the Bible ! 
And how hollow the moral lessons deduced from the twelve 
fairy tales ! Still again, how absurd to subordinate all Instruc- 
tion in the first year to these twelve stories, a plan which 
unnaturally splits up Instruction ! Use the stories, but not as 
material for moral, arithmetical, and other Instruction. Avoid, 
moreover, stimulating the fancy too much. 

Biblical narratives are by no means too difficult for young 
children; indeed, they are so natural, truthful, simple, and 
impressive that they readily seize the juvenile mind. Fables 
are known even to children as being fictitious, and should not 
be used for religious Instruction. Doubtless biblical stories 
require some preparation, but this has already been provided 
in Christmas and other festivals. 

Then as to Robinson Crusoe. The high claims put forward 
on behalf of this story (that it is full of moral value, etc.) cannot 
be justified ; moreover the story ought not to belong to the 

1 This is precisely what the wiser Zillerians would admit. The child is 
too young to be fed with moral or religious material in the ordinary sense. 



B artels 115 



second school year, it would do better for boys of thirteen 
craving for adventures ; Crusoe, too, is an eighteenth-century 
hero, largely fictitious ; he does not represent a " culture stage " 
earlier than the patriarchal. He knows agriculture, the com- 
pass, etc. ; no child at the age supposed possesses the requisite 
apperception-material, and if he did he would get tired of Crusoe, 
Crusoe, for a whole year. Far better would it be to let the 
children " begin at home " than to try to make them assimilate 
all the geographical and other matter presented in the Crusoe 
story. Herbart, like Eousseau, approved of the story, but not 
for seven-year-olds. Besides, why should such young children 
have to "subject nature to their service" as Crusoe did? In 
fact the case for Crusoe is far weaker than for the fairy tales. 

Less need be said of the other school years, for which the 
Zillerians definitely select biblical material. But the problem 
still rises ; is there the parallelism between racial and individual 
development? Do the "culture stages" correspond to real 
apperception stages of the child's mind? Especially wrong is 
the giving of only one year to the life of Christ, and the long 
time spent on the Old Testament. Are the "judges" any 
advance on the "patriarchs"? 

What about schools in which the year's course is not com- 
pleted — as happened even at the practising school in Leipzig ! 
Various hindrances may prevent a child from reaching the first 
class. Surely a scheme should meet contingencies like these ! 
Again, what about a school without eight classes ? In a four- 
class school are we to drop stages, or alternate them thus : 
1880, Fables ; 1881, Robinson ; 1882, Fables ; and so on ? But 
the latter plan means that Eobinson must sometimes precede 
Fables ! 

Beligious Services. — As the Zillerians reject biblical history 
for the earlier years they compensate for the loss by means of 
religious services which, however, are not supposed to take the 
form of "Instruction". But who can deal, e.g., with the life 
of Jesus without giving " Instruction " ? Moreover, to separate 
devotion from Instruction is scarcely conformable with the 
doctrine of " Concentration ". Again, these services will 



n6 The Critics of Herbartianism 

necessarily be either beyond the younger children or below the 
older ones— hence weariness. 

" Concentric Circles." — The Herbartians are severe on this 
plan, that of making each " school year " take up much the same 
material as the previous one, but amplifying it in ever widening 
circles. In preference to this the Herbartians recommend a 
chronological order (" culture stages "), and claim that " con- 
centric circles " involve weariness and satiety owing to constant 
repetitions. 

But (says the critic) this plan of "circles" has long been 
approved by great educationists, like Gomenius, and even 
Herbartians like Dorpfeld and Lentz approve of it, though in 
conjunction with the rival plan. It is quite right to begin with 
some simple facts and then make them more definite as the age 
of the pupil increases ; thus we keep the old material safe and 
sound (which the Zillerians are in danger of not doing) and add 
each year fresh material. The old apperceives the new. 

Ziller's plan allows of all kinds of thought- wanderings, as 
when the mention of Bremen is supposed to awaken such 
Interest as to justify a geographical discussion. Surely we 
ought to go "from near to far". Instead of following this 
sound principle, Ziller allows quite young children to learn 
about the geography of the East, and to discuss all kinds of 
difficult matters (like hereditary succession, in connection with 
the Judges). The plan of "concentric circles," on the other 
hand, allows of a gradual advance. 

If the Zillerians protest against everlasting repetition, we 
protest against neglect of repetition. Again, the plan of 
" culture stages " can only properly be applied to eight-class 
schools, that of "concentric circles " to any schools ; and thus 
even if a boy has to leave school before reaching the top class 
this is not so serious a matter in the second case as in the first. 

" Concentration." — The Herbartian psychology ignores the 
unity of the self; hence an artificial " concentration " has to be 
brought about. All educators admit that knowledge should be 
unified as far as possible. But instead of effecting this, Ziller's 
plan really brings about disunion, for each department of study 



Ostermann 117 



that is subordinated to the central one receives only a scrappy- 
treatment. Thus geography has to follow the fortunes of the 
patriarchs and so forth, instead of pursuing its own natural 
course. Ziller has tried to deny that this is the outcome of his 
proposals, but in vain. 

It is quite right to connect together related material. But 
the tendency of Ziller's plan is towards a merely external con- 
necting, as when the burial of the patriarchs in the limestone 
hills of Canaan is used as a peg on which to hang a lesson on 
the properties of chalk. Surely each subject should be allowed 
to awaken its own interest. Many even of his followers have 
modified his plan so as to introduce several "centres," and to 
give independence to science, etc. Moreover the supposed paral- 
lelism between Jewish and profane history is quite imaginary. 

Still, the Zillerians deserve credit for having insisted on the 
idea of " concentration ". Lessons should fit into each other 
and throw as much light upon each other as possible. All 
natural and useful connections should be made use of. 

The Formal Steps. — This is the best part of the Herbartian 
system, though it is not original. Comenius had drawn up a 
very similar plan : Example, Explanation, Bule, Exercise. The 
teacher must not become enslaved to Herbart's scheme. The 
first of the " steps " is often unnecessary, and the giving of the 
" goal " is not always possible. 



SECTION IV. 

OSTEEMANN. 

(1887.) 
Reference. 

Ostermann. Die liauptsachlichsten Irrtilmer der Herbartschen Psy- 
chologic unci ihre pddagogischen Konseguenzen. Oldenburg and Leipzig, 

1887. 

No part of Herbart's philosophy has been more violently 
attacked than his psychology; a work dealing with the " Critics 



n8 The Critics of Herbartianism 



of Herbartianism" ought therefore to include a discussion of 
psychological problems. Ostermann's attack was on these 
lines, and also touched upon pedagogical matters. 

Herbart thought himself driven to the assumption of a 
multitude of absolutely simple "reals," devoid of "faculties," 
etc., by the contradictions which, experience offers, e.g., the 
contradiction involved in the view that a single thing can 
possess a multiplicity of qualities. 1 

From the interaction of these hypothetical "reals" arise (on 
Herbart's view) presentations or ideas. Once a presentation 
has arisen it persists unchanged until disturbed by others. 
With these it may enter into various relations. 

(1) Two similar tones (e.g.) may fuse to a stronger tone. 

(2) Two disparate sensations (colour, smell, etc., of an orange) 
may complicate or unite. 

(3) Two contrary presentations may check each other so far 
as they are opposed, and unite so far as they are not checked. 

No presentation is ever destroyed, though it may be driven 
below the threshold and then merely strive to be presented. 
The amount of checking it experiences depends on (1) its own 
native strength ; (2) the degree of opposition exerted by other 
presentations. 

Apperception occurs when a new presentation is passive 
relatively to old presentations. 2 Attention is largely dependent 
on Apperception ; it is the energetic and lasting self-maintenance 
of a presentation in consciousness. 

Ostermann offers various criticisms of the above doctrine. 
Even supposing that the " simple " soul is able to generate pre- 
sentations, how can these latter persist after the ceasing of the 
conjunction which brought them forth ? Herbart regarded the 
presentations as immortal, but the analogy of the first law of 
motion is not to the point (" A body persists . . . "), for 

1 Ostermann's discussion of Herbart's metaphysics must here be almost 
entirely omitted. 

2 Don Quixote's fixed ideas seized hold of a new experience (windmills) 
and interpreted or apperceiyed it, 



Ostermann 119 



presentations are inner states, not, like motion, external quali- 
ties 'of a body. Surely a presentation generated out of the 
interaction of " reals " must cease when the interaction is 
over. 

Herbart was wrong when he regarded all presentations as 
having definite intensities and definite amounts of mutual 
opposition. The memory-image of a thunderclap is of very 
different intensity from that of the sound itself. Again, Wundt 
has shown experimentally that two contrasting impressions 
(black and white) do not only not check, but actually aid each 
other. So also with concepts ; what easier than to think of 
opposites ? Herbart, in fact, forgets that though the presenta- 
tion-contents may be opposed, the mental activities they call 
forth may not be opposite at all. 

What is the nature of the supposed "checking" between 
two presentations ? He regards it as a kind of mutual me- 
chanical pressure. But is this a tenable view ? True, the 
soul, in experiencing the two opposed presentations, a and b, 
may strive to remove this opposition by getting rid of one of 
them. But can a and b resist each other ? Are they in- 
dependent existences? Herbart' 's view destroys the unity of 
the soul. 1 

Again, what meaning can be attached to the statement that 
the checked presentations show a "striving to be presented"? 
We can understand it if we regard it as a material tension. But 
presentations are mental states ; how, then, can they be in 
unconsciousness ? Herbart was driven to this view by the 
stringency of his metaphysics ; being forbidden to assume 
"faculties" he had to assume that presentations always exist, 
even in unconsciousness. But on our theory they need no more 
exist than the note of a musical string need always be sound- 
ing ; the conditions of reproduction exist, but not the note itself. 
Even the physiological view would be better than Herbart's, 

1 This conclusion is probably a true one. Still, we must not forget that 
Herbart's metaphysical " real " or " soul " is supposed to be existent all 
this time. 



120 The Critics of Herbartianism 

for it provides a substratum (nerves, etc.) for presentations. 
But Herbart will neither allow of this nor of any activity of the 
soul itself. With him, each presentation is virtually a little soul, 
and the total soul-activity is divided up into presentation- 
activities; thus there is no unity, and we cannot understand 
how presentations come ever to be united. Eeally this union 
is the work of the soul, but Herbart has to assume links between 
the presentations; each of the latter, however, is, for him, an 
entity in itself. 

He conveniently allows that the action and suffering of the 
presentation are also the action and suffering of the soul. Thus 
we appear to have a double series of events. 

The doctrine of mutual " checking " involves either that the 
presentations are separate entities or that one part of the soul 
checks another part. Each view destroys the unity of the soul. 
Or can it be that the whole soul checks itself? Again, how 
can the soul itself be "unalterable" if all these processes take 
place in it? Herbart insists that the metaphysical soul takes 
no part in mental events ! 

There is no possible way of explaining mental life if we 
assume that each presentation has a content and activity of its 
own. No theory of " fusion " will suffice. In all mental 
processes there must be present a unitary principle which 
compares, relates, etc., the different presentations. We cannot 
explain Intelligence and the forming of general ideas as a result 
of the reproduction, fusion, and checking of a multitude of 
similar presentations. The concept itself cannot be "pre- 
sented"; it is abstract, and stands for certain relations estab- 
lished by thought. Thus the concept "animal" grasps in itself 
all different animals. 

Herbart has a theory of " collective presentations " 1 which 
he regards as stepping-stones to concepts proper. But if such 
presentations existed we should be unable to revive the older 



1 Generally called "generic images" by English psychologists. Such 
an image (e.g., of " man ") is supposed to be the vague residual image left 
after a number of individual images of men have been superimposed. 



Ostermann 121 



single ones, for their special traits would have been suppressed. 
Throughout the whole of Herbart's system the unifying function 
of the soul is ignored. 

Equally unsatisfactory is his treatment of Feeling and Desire, 
which are supposed to arise out of presentations according as 
the movements of these favour or hinder each other. Herbart 
infers that pedagogically the presentations are the most im- 
portant mental elements, while joys and sorrows are but 
transitory. Even sensible feelings, according to Herbart, rest 
ultimately on minute presentational units. There is no " Feel- 
ing" faculty, or "Desire" faculty; all depends on the inter- 
actions of presentations. Desire is an advancing movement, 
Feeling a resting condition. 

But surely (says Ostermann) Feeling belongs to the soul, not 
to presentations. The Herbartians transfer the effect of the 
"checkings" to the soul itself. But in reality what one 
presentation loses in activity another must gain. There is no 
gain or loss for the soul taken as a whole ; why then should it 
experience pleasure or pain ? Or is there a constant oscillation 
of pleasure and pain corresponding to the checking, etc., of 
presentations? Surely we must posit a faculty of Feeling, 
which is quite as original a function as Presentation. Presen- 
tations may stimulate this faculty into operation, but there must 
first be the faculty itself. How otherwise would such an idea 
as that of danger give rise to any feeling at all ? Of course the 
faculty is not separate from the soul itself. Herbart's attack 
was directed against a false faculty doctrine which separated 
the "faculties" from the soul. 

There are many sensory pains, etc., which come into con- 
sciousness without any presentational content. Can Herbart 
deny or explain this ? x Again, feelings differ in colouring as 
well as in intensity ; compare avarice with aesthetic feeling. 
Ballauf and other Herbartians admit this, but it is not recon- 
cilable with Herbart's own doctrine. 

Again, if it be true that those presentations which rise to the 

1 He posits minute presentational elements as the basis of such pains, 
etc, 



The Critics of Herbartianism 



highest clearness bear the most lively feelings, we should expect 
the study of mathematics to be intensely emotional. Facts tell 
a different story. Again, the clear image of a distant friend 
awakens melancholy, not pleasure. The Herbartian theory 
ignores the content, or significance, or worth of presentations, 
and considers their quantitative relations only. Later Her- 
bartians, like Ballauf and Strumpell, have tended to admit a 
" Feeling " faculty, thus being really faithless to Herbart. 

The Herbartians are right in emphasising the close con- 
nection between Desire and Presentation ; we cannot desire 
what we cannot think of. But we do not desire what is 
actually present, whereas, according to Herbart, each desire is 
bound to a present content. 

Certain cases of mental disturbance mentioned by Nathan 
prove that the Will can control the course of presentations, and 
is therefore not a mere product of them. 

The Will and its Freedom. — Will (according to Herbart) is 
Desire plus Certainty. Desire is a product of the presentation- 
mechanism ; so also must Will be. But if moral action is 
dependent on an estimation of value (as Herbart affirms), how 
can this be reconciled with the mechanical view? He holds 
that the moral judgment must, in order to prevail, be connected 
with a strong unified mass of thoughts, whose mechanical 
strength will overcome all opposing ideas. Good ! But where 
is the role of the moral judgment ? 

Even his notion of a fusion of repeated volitions (after the 
manner of the formation of concepts) does not lift us out of the 
realm of mechanism. Freedom, in fact, is entirely excluded 
from the system. No doubt he speaks of Inner Freedom 
( = volition according to the moral judgments) but even this 
seems to depend on the mechanical strength of presentation- 
masses. Where is responsibility? He dismisses the question 
with a few words. Practically, he says, we must not go beyond 
the Will in passing judgment. But as he resolves Will into a 
mechanical process, he really gets rid of responsibility. We 
may admit that the question is a difficult one, but somehow we 
must preserve responsibility. 



Ostermann 123 



The '"Faculty" Doctrine. — Herbart was right in protesting 
against the vulgar " faculty doctrine," which destroys the unity 
of the soul, brings on the scene empty powers apart from 
concrete mental life, and substitutes for a scientific explanation 
of mental facts a mere appeal to a suppositious "faculty". But 
Herbart has not succeeded in explaining mental life in terms 
of presentations, and by analogies derived from mechanics. 
Moreover, certain phenomena point to a distinct " memory 
faculty " as possessed by certain prodigies. Again there are 
specific differences of memory. We must assume that the soul 
has other modes of expressing itself than Presentation, though 
we must not assume any faculty separate from the soul itself. 

Pedagogical Besults. — Because of his presentationalism, Her- 
bart lays great stress on Instruction and upon the forming of 
" large unbroken masses of thought". The energy of the 
moral judgments depends upon their being connected with 
strong thought-masses. 

Is this view tenable ? The fact is, there must be an original 
unity such as is not provided by Herbart's system of separate 
presentations. The " concentration " doctrine does not bring 
about a unity, for we are never told how the presentations can 
fuse. Nor are we given any explanation of the moral life ; for 
whence comes the notion of ivorth if the whole mental life 
consists of presentations ? Still, the " concentration " plan has 
much intellectual value ; it impresses facts on the memory and 
conduces to culture ; it may even indirectly help character. 
But character depends mainly on disposition, not on presenta- 
tions. 

The peculiar " concentration " and " culture stages " doctrines 
of the Zillerians are highly artificial, and would probably have 
been condemned by Herbart himself, for he cautions us against 
aiming at an artificial unity, and against disrupting what ought 
to be connected. 

The " Interest " doctrine is said to be the most important one 
in the Herbartian scheme, and to have great moral significance. 
But on examination we find that Interest is a form of " in- 
voluntary attention," and depends upon the strength of pre- 



124 The Critics of Herbartianism 

sentations. Thus we are brought back to a mechanical view. 
At times we are told that Interest finds complete satisfaction 
in the present ; at other times that it compels to continuous 
self-activity and advance. In fact the Interest doctrine cannot 
be reconciled with Herbart's mechanical scheme. It is impos- 
sible to regard Feeling as a transitory modification of presenta- 
tions. 

The Herbartians lay stress on the need of Imagination. 
Actions must be thought about, pictured ; model images of 
actions must be formed. In this way (we are told) practical 
hindrances will be conquered when they arise. There is truth 
in this, but, after all, reflection will not ensure vigorous action. 
Strong Will depends mainly on natural endowment and on 
practice in overcoming difficulties. 

Even the Herbartians feel at times the need of calling forth 
energy, as when they recommend that at the beginning of each 
lesson its goal should be stated, so that, in this way, the pupil 
may exert all his powers. But where are these powers ? How 
can we explain them if each presentation has a definite maximum 
of energy, and there is no real energy of the soul itself ? The 
only hope of the Herbartians is in " concentrating " many pre- 
sentations. But in reality Will power arises through conflict, 
habit, natural endowment, etc. ; moreover, physical exercises 
contribute to it, as the English have recognised. 

But a Will must not only be strong, but directed to the 
Good. Here again Habit is important, but there must also be 
Education, and a rousing of Interest in what is good. But 
Interest is rooted in Feeling, hence Education must confer more 
than mere enlightenment. How are we to touch the heart ? 
Through actual occurrences, human life, example. The main 
thing is not Instruction, but Inspiration. Stories from history, 
songs, poetry, etc., are useful; Instruction, when given, must 
attach itself to concrete foundations, to definite situations, 
events, etc. 1 



1 Needless to say, all Herbartians would agree with this ; they lay im- 
mense stress on history, poetry, etc. 



Richter 125 



The Herbartians reply that mere appeals to Feeling have no 
permanent effect, for feelings are but transitory modifications of 
presentations. But their psychology is wrong. Feeling is as 
original as presentations, and leaves behind a permanent after- 
effect — Interest. Still, there may be excess even here ; and the 
Herbartians are right in emphasising the close connection of 
feelings and presentations. 

Herbartianism has furthered educational science ; it has pro- 
tested against catechetical methods; it has urged the import- 
ance of rousing independent and connected thought. But its 
goal is one-sided ; it neglects physical education ; its terminology 
is artificial ; its selection of fairy-tales for moral purposes is a 
mistake, for these tales are not moral; its emphasis on " con- 
centration " is overdone ; and its followers tend to become blind 
followers of their master's prescriptions. 



SECTION V. 
RICHTER. 

(1887.) 

Reference. 

Richter. Die Herbart-Zillerschen formalen Stufen des Unterrichts, nach 
ihrem Wesen, ihrer geschichtlichen Grundlage, und ihrer Anwendung im 
Volksschulunterrichte. Hesse, Leipzig, 1887. Second edition, 1898. 

This work is a "gekronte Preisschrift," an essay which won 
the prize offered in 1886 by an educational institute in Dresden 
for the best work on the subject, "The applicability of the 
Herbart - Ziller formal steps to instruction in elementary 
schools ". 

The author goes into the whole question with German 
thoroughness ; shows who were Herbart's predecessors (Coin- 
enius, etc.) in the task of working out the " formal steps " ; 
compares Herbart's treatment with Ziller's ; and finally arrives 
at the result that they are, on the whole, a sound contribution 



126 The Critics of Herbartianism 



to pedagogical practice inasmuch as they rest on the laws of 
learning, and lighten the task of teaching and acquisition. 

More valuable, however, than these portions of the work are 
the author's remarks on the limitations and dangers of the 
" formal steps ". But the reader must remember that the 
general verdict of Kichter — into the exact grounds of which we 
cannot here go — is favourable. 

The chief danger which the author urges is a familiar one 
— that mechanical teachers will apply the " steps " without 
judgment and discretion, and make them into a rigid scheme 
which will check rather than encourage thought. 

Ziller himself has already pointed out certain limitations of 
his scheme. It is inapplicable to such material as is already 
abstract in form, e.g., a scientific reading book, a grammar, a 
catechism, 1 an historical table, a portion of the Bible with 
direct didactic tendency (Sermon on the Mount, etc.). Such 
materials already represent worked-up results, hence they 
afford no opportunity of a movement from Anschauung to 
Denken (thinking), and so on. Similarly, the correcting or the 
repetition of exercises, and various accidental occurrences such 
as may happen on a school excursion, cannot, as a rule, be 
treated in accordance with the formal steps. So also with the 
acquisition of skill in writing, etc. 

In point of fact, Ziller's excepting of catechetical instruction 
from the scope of the formal steps is not altogether valid. 
Even religious instruction should start from the concrete and 
work forward towards the maxims of the catechism, in full accord- 
ance with Herbart's procedure, which starts with Anschauung, 
goes on to Thinking, and finally arrives at Application. 

The Zillerians attack the catechism violently, on the grounds 
that it omits any initial statement of the goal of the lesson, 
checks free activity by the way it throws out its questions, 
makes children use words they do not fully understand and 



1 The common teaching of the catechism proceeds on precisely opposite 
principles to the formal steps. The child learns the abstract statement, 
and then this is illustrated by concrete examples when possible. 



Richter 127 



judgments not arising from insight, and breaks up what should 
be in connection. This assault of the Zillerians is in part 
justified, but they ignore the fact that there may be a real use 
for the catechism. 

They also undervalue questioning in general, and prefer to 
draw out children's speech by such words as "and," "but," 
etc. Here, again, this proposal may be useful in certain cir- 
cumstances, e.g., when a child is reproducing something already 
learnt ; but again we must not lay down any rule. 

Children have small powers of speech and of mental grasp ; 
we must use questions ; they help to impress facts. At higher 
stages questions involving long answers are good. 

Some extreme Zillerians have even recommended that in 
teaching writing an attempt should be made to carry out the 
formal steps ; letters have to be analysed into their elements, 
compared, and so forth. This is absurd. Writing, reading, 
drawing, singing are matters of practice, and must be treated 
as such. 1 

Ziller it was, not Herbart, who used the expression " formal " 
in connection with the steps. The expression implies that the 
material is negligible. This is not so. The material of in- 
struction must dictate its own methods of treatment. 

The Herbartians underestimate the value of silent, spon- 
taneous development. The object itself exerts power upon the 
pupil. 

Ziller recommends the division of a lesson into method units, 
each of which is to be worked through in accordance with the 
formal steps. But if the units are very small, great artificiality 
and weariness result from such a treatment. Ziller tries to 
avoid this by recommending movements from one " method 
unit " to another and back again. 

Let us rather consider the children's capacities in dividing 



1 Dr. Findlay has done splendid service by drawing a clear line of de- 
marcation between " the acquirement of knowledge " and " the acquirement 
of skill ". It is to the former process that the " formal steps " are applicable. 
Principles of Class Teaching. 



128 The Critics of Herbartianism 

up our material. One lesson may prepare the way for another ; 
thus the latter may not require the "first step" (preparation) 
at all. Now one step, now another, may be omitted, and 
various other modifications of the scheme be made according 
to circumstances. Sometimes a lesson must be mainly syn- 
thesis (step two) ; sometimes " application " may be impossible 
without great artificiality (as when the Herbartians bring moral 
considerations on the scene which are only remotely connected 
with the rest of the lesson). We see clear signs of artificiality 
in the lessons drawn up by Eein, Staude, and other Her- 
bartians, especially in dealing with the fifth step, which, with 
them, becomes either mere repetition or goes quite beyond the 
child. 

The Herbartians are right in urging that abstraction must be 
preceded by apperception, but it is not true that abstraction 
must always follow apperception. The child may be too young 
to go beyond the stage of apperception. But the Zillerians 
seem to think that all the five stages must be run through on 
every occasion. 

They also urge that the goal of the lesson should be held 
clearly in view from the first, and that it must be given by the 
children — a process which involves (says Richter) much guess- 
work and waste of time. 

The Zillerians say that the goal must be actual, not a mere 
" next chapter," etc. But often we cannot follow out this 
prescription, for to do so would be actually to introduce the 
new matter, which is forbidden. The Zillerian rule has its 
utility, but often cannot be carried out. 

Ziller also recommends that at the first stage many side- 
issues may be permitted to be suggested by the pupils ; this 
is supposed to prepare the way for the new matter. But in 
point of fact the plan merely leads to useless discursiveness. 
Herbart has actually warned us against such a danger. 

For the stage of synthesis Ziller makes the unexpected pro- 
posal that instead of the teacher presenting the new matter 
to the pupils it may be read by the pupils out of a book. Here 
he departs from Herbart, and men like Dorpfeld have rightly 



Richter 129 



protested against so reactionary a proposal. To think that a 
child, halting and stumbling as he reads, can properly assimilate 
the new matter is absurd. 

Again Ziller recommends that exercises on the new material 
be imposed on individual scholars — not on the class collectively. 
But this means that most of the pupils will be doing nothing 
but listening. Surely, questions — on which Ziller does not look 
with favour — will engage the attention of the whole class. 

As a substitute, Ziller proposes a kind of discussion or dis- 
putation ; without this, he says, the pupils do not become fully 
conscious of what they know and can do. Strange proposal ! 
This mediaeval disputation method has long been banished from 
the Latin school ; here is Ziller trying to introduce it into the 
elementary school ! But how is the method possible with large 
classes? Where will discipline be? How are we to prevent 
chattering, or to draw forth the silent members of the class ? 

Ziller, like many educationists, objects to children learning 
ready-made scientific results from text-books, and recommends 
that they start from the concrete and work towards the abstract 
results. But he is inconsistent in permitting (at the stage of 
" system ") the attained results to be compared with the results 
in a book. If pupils are once allowed to use a book at all they 
will have curiosity enough to use it for other purposes. 

At the last stage ("application") Ziller recommends (in con- 
nection with the treatment of " Gesinnungsstoff ") that children's 
imagination should be exercised on action ; for thinking about 
action aids real subsequent action by helping to conquer possible 
hindrances. " What would you have done in Adam's place? 
What would you have done in such and such dangerous circum- 
stances?" 

But is there much value in this ? Moralisings are of little 
use. Unless children have had considerable life experiences 
they cannot profit by such discussions ; or they may even be 
led to think of actions of dubious value. It is easy to imagine 
action ; but though spirit may be willing, flesh is weak. 

Many of the " applications " recommended by Zillerians like 
Staude are quite beyond the mental capacity of children. What 

9 



130 The Critics of Herbartianism 

is the use of discussing with them the social origin of revolu- 
tions or the rights and wrongs of polygamy ? 

It is important that the formal steps, when used, shall be 
used with due regard to the nature of the object taught, and 
of the pupil. Some children are more capable of abstract 
thought than others whose minds are of the Anschauung type. 
Some heads are " practical," others " theoretical ". Then, 
again, differences of age are important. We must not with 
young children always insist on the third and fourth stages, 
for these children may be too young to " abstract " correctly. 
Conversely, older pupils we must not always force into infantile 
grooves by insisting on the first two stages. 

After school days are over, new matter is not acquired in 
exact accordance with the " formal steps". The new often 
comes as already abstract. Schools must remember that they 
have to consider the future of their pupils, and must not over- 
estimate the value of any scheme. 

Then, there is the teacher. The formal steps afford him 
useful guidance, and he ought not to give himself over to 
mere lawlessness. Still, the Herbartian rules are only general, 
and cannot give precise directions. In the same way a judge 
has to apply general laws to special cases. The best advice 
to teachers is — learn the rules first, and afterwards acquire the 
necessary freedom. " The letter killeth, the spirit giveth life." 

SECTION VI. 
VOGEL. 
(1887.) 

Reference. 
Vogel. Herbart oder Pestalozzi. Eine kritische Darstellung und Ver- 
gleichung ihrer Systeme als Beitrag zur richtigen Wiirdigung ihres 
gegenseitigen Verhaltnisses. Dr. August Vogel, 1887. 

" Hurrah for Herbart ! " " Hurrah for Pestalozzi ! " are cries 
we hear on every side. It is important that we should decide 
as to the respective claims of these leaders. 



Vogel 131 

Pestalozzi was a genial reformer whose life, except for one 
brief period at Burgdorf, seemed a failure. But he was a true 
pioneer. Though despised by many of his contemporaries, he 
is now regarded by mankind as one from whom progress 
received a new impulse. But a second impulse was required 
for the establishment and development of his principles. 

Herbart was another educational philosopher whose views, 
like those of Pestalozzi, received but scant recognition in his 
lifetime, but who, nevertheless, founded a school of thinkers. 
Its earliest adherents misunderstood his system and engaged 
in conflict with Pestalozzi's followers ; the former maintaining 
that Herbart was the first to employ psychology for educational 
purposes, the latter claiming that Pestalozzi had already done 
this. 

Herbart' s Starting Point in Psychology. — Herbart makes the 
" ego " the starting point in psychology and discovers a con- 
tradiction in it, a contradiction which rests entirely upon 
his assumption that Knowing and Being are irreconcilable ; 
throughout his system, as the bitter opponent of Idealism, he 
seeks to establish this. We feel, however, Vogel maintains, 
that Being in its highest sense is known, and that the anti- 
thesis between Being and Knowing cannot be maintained; 
even Herbart is not prepared to uphold it logically ; he states 
that the beginning of knowledge consists in ideas and that 
these rest on experience which teaches what things are. Man 
lives among ceaseless confusion of the different departments of 
Being and Happening, of appearances which are involved in 
change, and feelings consequent on these changes bring ideas 
home to him. The foundation doctrine of Herbart 's Psychology 
is that feelings or perceptions are self-preservations of the soul, 
and this means that the soul is not originally a power for 
reflexion, it is not composed of real and ideal activity ; but 
rather there must be postulated for its whole spiritual mani- 
foldness, a sufficient number of presentations, and self-con- 
sciousness arises only from these and exists entirely in the 
relations among these ; it is only a changed relation of the soul, 
yet inner experience sufficiently proves that the I and self- 



132 The Critics of Herbartianism 



consciousness do not remain, as it were, on the periphery of 
the soul as on accidental relation. They are rather that which 
constitutes the inmost germ of it, that which gives it its worth 
and supreme importance. If we take self-consciousness as the 
essential element from the idea of the soul, it fades away to an 
uncertain something which cannot form the centre of the whole 
inner life of a man in all its height and breadth. The necessary 
hypothesis for all spiritual and moral life and action is lacking 
in a soul without self-consciousness, and if the latter is a matter 
of accident entirely, every scientific explanation of the spiritual 
life is thereby rendered impossible. 

The Soul, according to Herbart, is a Eeal Thing, and as 
such, a simple essence, subject to neither time nor space ; it 
has talents and faculties neither to receive nor to produce 
anything, and its Simple Quale is and remains unknown. 

That Time and Place must be excluded from a soul, as a 
simple essence existing for itself, rests on easily understood 
general metaphysical principles. But of greater importance is 
Herbart' s assertion that the Soul in its absolute being can 
receive nothing from without, nor produce anything of itself, 
but that all mental life arises from the relations between several 
simple essences and the accidental union of these. 

Now Herbart's real soul has originally neither presentations 
nor feelings, nor desires ; it knows nothing of itself and nothing 
of other things. In it there are no forms of thought, no laws 
of willing and acting, and no sort of preparation, however 
distant, for these. Yet in spite of this impressive assurance, 
every Eeal essence of Herbart's, and therefore also the real 
soul, has a distinct .peculiar quality through which the effects 
proceeding from the union of several essences are determined. 
Does Herbart then mean that while every effect can only 
spring from the union of several essences, one by itself exer- 
cises no effect ? If he does not mean this, he must maintain 
that the Quality peculiar to a Eeal essence is present in the 
union, but vanishes in the non-union. But a quality which is 
neither a power, nor a faculty, nor anything else of this sort, 
must be nothing, and such a quality cannot possibly exercise 



Vogel 133 



any influence in the union of several real essences — not even 
the apparent effect of Herbart's ideas — nor can the world of 
Being and Happening be explained by means of such essences. 
The union of essences which presupposes pressures and re- 
sistances, postulates some power of receiving and producing" 
in the essences, which must be present not only in their union, 
but when they are isolated also. 

Psychology and Physiology. — Further, it seems to us a doubtful 
proceeding to try and explain purely psychical events by such 
expressions as belong to mechanics and hydrostatics. May 
they always remain as pictures and analogies, not as true 
explanations ! And when Herbart traces analogy between 
psychology and physiology, and asserts that as the latter 
constructs the body from fibres, so the former constructs the 
soul out of sets of presentations, and as in the one case the 
excitability of the fibres is a much disputed point, so in the 
other case is the excitability of the sets of presentations ; this 
is again an indication of Herbart's mechanical comprehension 
of the soul's functions. 

The now generally received hypothesis of the indivisible and 
therefore simple atoms unchangeable in spite of all apparent 
change, certainly explains many natural appearances more 
naturally than the older scientific propositions; yet directly it 
is taken over into the territory of the Soul, it sets itself in 
direct opposition to scientific axioms as well as to Experience. 

Soul Evolution. — The soul is ever forming for itself higher 
and broader ideas, which furnish the undeniable essentials for 
the perfecting of the moral life. Least of all then should 
Herbart call the soul unchangeable unless he mean that all 
progress in soul-life is but appearance and deception, and this 
he seems to argue. 

Herbart's Theories Preclude Possibility of Progress. — That 
the soul steps out of life exactly as it entered it, precludes all 
possibility of evolution, and makes the perfecting of the man, 
and, therefore, of the human race, an illusion and deceptive 
appearance only. Ethics and psychology are then unnecessary 
and impossible. A psychology which denies every power, every 



134 The Critics of Herbartianism 



faculty, and, especially, every kind of evolution of the Soul, 
cannot include in its survey the infinite rich life of the latter, 
and can never suffice for scientific investigation, or guide the 
teacher and moral educator. 

With Herbart, the real Soul is at the basis of all psycho- 
logical events, and in its accidental union with other reals, it 
suffers through the feelings some sort of disturbance, then 
Presentation results. We note throughout the term disturb- 
ance, not exciting or inciting. Herbart makes the Soul in- 
violable and incapable of change, but the man who sees in 
these outer causes the first beginnings of more and more perfect 
development of the human soul, the proper reason of which lies 
in itself, will not only not regard them as disturbances, but as 
necessary and blessed incitement to the further evolution of a 
soul that is capable of development, and only from this stand- 
point can the perfecting of the individual, as well as of the 
whole race, be logically accepted as possible. If Herbart 
wishes, as he does, not only to grant the possibility of this, 
but to declare and explain it, he must first of all renounce the 
rigid unchangeableness of the soul; unchangeableness and 
evolution form an irreconcilable antithesis, although this very 
unchangeableness and self-preservation premises a latent power 
of resistance, but we do not agree with Herbart when he says 
that this power disappears when opposing force is withdrawn. 
It rather is real and active, and is first perceived by us upon 
a given incitement. Otherwise, all independence and freedom 
is denied to man, that spark of the Divine Being which Nature 
called into existence according to her own laws, and without 
which all presentations due to other reals would be valueless 
to its own life and development. If it cannot be denied that 
the psychological course of soul-life, as far as it appears, is 
subject to laws, yet it must also be granted that it withdraws 
itself from these natural laws, just in proportion as it retires 
into the depths of its proper self. 

As far as the spirit makes use of the wonderfully constituted 
organism of the body for its activity, so far, but only so far, is it 
lawful to apply the laws of statics and mechanics, as well as 



Vogel 135 

mathematical calculation, to psychology. No laws of nature 
apply to the transcendental Being of the Soul. The man who 
thinks he can sound the depths of the power of the inner soul- 
life by an example in arithmetic is a materialist, and, therefore, 
an atheist. 

Innate Special Faculty. — Herbart violently contests the exist- 
ence of innate special faculty. We, however, contend that the 
faculties themselves are different modifications of the one soul, 
which is the same in all of them. Just as many coexist in the 
absolute, as the members in an organism, as ideas in criticism, 
so are the faculties related to the soul. 

Even Herbart, in spite of his violent polemic against soul 
powers, cannot do away with the necessity of vindicating at 
least three powers for his real soul : Perception, Presentation, 
Reproduction or Memory. 

With Herbart the only happening that takes place in the 
soul is self-preservation against disturbance, but Desire and Will 
are something quite different from self-preservation, since the 
soul in these conditions places itself in connection with the outer 
world. With Herbart the true life of the soul, if such it can be 
called, like the Buddhist-Nirvana, continues, in spite of all dis- 
turbance from without, to all eternity. That which otherwise 
would gladden the human soul or sadden it to death, leaves no 
trace according to Herbart's doctrine. 

The Will. — In considering the Will we enter the domain of 
ethics, and if Herbart had extended his metaphysical and psy- 
chological hypothesis in this direction it would have been 
impossible for him to arrive at any fundamental ethical ideas. 
How could an essence without any powers or activities be 
made responsible for any thought or wish or deed ? Yet 
responsibility is the base idea of all ethical considerations. 
Without spontaneous power, the soul is simply a sport for 
that chance which, according to Herbart, is supreme throughout 
the universe. He would have the soul in its inner being as 
little moved by the wildest combat of conflicting presentations 
as the centre of the earth by the thunder of cannon or the 
march of war-steeds. It is not the Intellect which thinks and 



136 The Critics of Herbartiani$m 

observes, not the Eeason which weighs according to its own 
principles, not the Will which resolves, but presentations in 
their union become powers independent of the actionless, and, 
therefore, irresponsible soul. 

Herbart's Idea of God. — If Herbart, in spite of all this, at- 
tributes five moral ideas — Freedom, Perfection, Benevolence, 
Eight, and Equity — to the Soul, according to which it judges 
an expression of Will as being pleasing or hateful, moral or im- 
moral, good or bad, this is indeed opposed to his whole system, 
though by it he obtains a bridge by which to pass over into the 
territory of ethics and aesthetics, which would be otherwise 
impossible — and here he is surely guilty of inconsistency, and 
according to his metaphysics God is also a simple real essence 
with simple quality, who like every other real soul can only 
arrive at thinking through union with other souls, and therefore 
cannot be the commanding intelligence or the Creator of Souls. 
Thus, in criticising Herbart's metaphysics, Vogel attacks first 
his premise that contradictions form the beginning and the end 
of all speculation, and that these contradictions lie in the forms 
of the data, as they are at first thought of by means of ideas. 

His Elaboration of Ideas. — He contends that although the 
notional elaboration of the data or of experience, especially in 
the case of the beginner, becomes entangled in all sorts of con- 
tradictions, these do not arise from the data. Incorrect results 
in Science, as in life, rest for the most part on incorrect 
premises which have been obtained by a superficial or hastily 
concluded observation of the data, and only a small proportion 
are due to insufficient comparison of correctly obtained facts 
of experience or to purely logical mishaps. Motive for thought 
cannot be sought in the contradiction, but rather in the strong 
impulse which is woven into the very heart of man, to discover 
the law, which lies at the root of given appearances, i.e., the truth, 
towards which insufficient experience can be no starting point 
at all. 

" The Method of Relations." — Herbart's "Method of Rela- 
tions " by which he seeks to expand ideas, leads too soon into 
the airy regions of purely metaphysical ideas, and away from 



Vogel 137 

the necessary practical experience, and though professedly- 
starting from the latter he soon rejects its authority as being 
burdened with contradictions which only thinking is able to 
solve, whereas these pretended contradictions should be elimin- 
ated at once by means of closer observation. With regard to 
Herbart's ideas of Things themselves and to the idea of Being, 
as a kind of fixing, it is easier to agree with him, and Kant had 
already established the same, but when he argues that the 
Eeal does not lie in the thing thought of, but in the thinking, 
he places Thinking and Being in irreconcilable hostility. 

"Accidental Helps to Vision" — He sets in motion with his 
"accidental helps to Vision" and his construction of Ideas an 
artificial apparatus, and does not lead up to real explanations. 
He leaves us to put " accident " in the place of real cause, but 
where chance reigns laws have no power, and where no law 
operates there is an end of science, the object of which is the 
discovery of laws in the apparent chaos of appearances. 

Herbart's System in Opposition to Idealism. — Vogel feels that 
Herbart's whole system is the exact opposite of the idealistic in 
which the Ego is itself the only true Eeal and the principle of 
all things, therefore of the so-called objective world. Herbart 
does not recognise a Eeal in the Ego, but only a relation arising 
out of the objective presentations, whereas the Ego, as well as 
self-consciousness, can surely neither proceed from mere pre- v 
sentations of the Objective world, nor can these presentations 
exist without a presupposed self-consciousness. The Ego must 
be a thinking subject, and thinking without self -consciousness is a « 
contradiction. Herbart seems to limit knowledge to accidental 
and soulless appearance, not to agreement of Thinking with 
Being, and instead of leading up to truth, seems to go down into 
the darkness of doubt, though it is only fair to say that Herbart 
at times commits himself to a contradiction and gives glimmers 
of the Actual. 

Vogel's Summing Up. — In summarising his criticism, Vogel 
says, " We cannot recognise either Herbart's principles or the 
deductions therefrom as correct, and the wearisome tediousness 
of his expositions and terminology militates strongly against 



138 The Critics of Herbartianism 



their acceptance ". The latter objection, however, Vogel brings 
also against Kant and Fichte. a On the other hand, the bold- 
ness of Herbart's thought in referring the whole psychic life to 
the presentation as the final cause, must exercise effect on 
every thinker who is seeking for final causes, and all hypotheses 
which throw light on the way to these, deserve our thanks and 
recognition. No one of them may be able to solve the pro- 
blem of soul-life or the riddles of the world, but yet may 
serve to guide the restless, eager, investigating mind towards 
the solution of the most difficult problems that are presented 
to the minds of men." 

Pestalozzi's Psychology : The Moral Life. — While claiming 
on the one hand that the animal instincts in man must be sub- 
dued in order that the human may evolve unchecked, on the 
other hand Pestalozzi argues that as human art is subordinate 
to man's spirit, its cultivation is imperative upon every indi- 
vidual, and the germ of the power for this lies in the inner soul 
of man and proceeds from the union of spiritual, moral, and 
physical powers, powers innate in man and endowed with the 
impulse towards development and perfection. 

A Child's Powers. — The powers of a child are immeasurable, 
but for healthy evolution must develop in orderly, organic 
unity, the unity of an organism in which the God-like essence 
lives, an essence which is free and autonomous, and which 
though imbibing life from its sense-surroundings is not physi- 
cally bound. At first it exists in germ only, and is subject to 
eternal, immutable laws which lie at the basis of all natural 
development ; but divine love, and human love if it has a divine 
bias, is the mainspring which directs the uplifting of man's 
sensual and animal nature through his spiritual nature. Faith 
and love unify all his powers of knowing and acting, and are to 
man as an eternal evolving being, as the roots are to a tree, 
giving him strength to draw the nourishment necessary for 
his development. 

Cf. Qui que tu sois, l'amour est ton maitre, 
II Test, il le fut, et il le doit etre. (Dumas.) 



Vogel 139 

Motive Powers of Development. — Pestalozzi next makes a fine 
distinction between animal thinking and animal art (dependent 
on the perceptions of our race from purely sensual contemplation), 
and human power of thinking (of which the highest results of 
the animal are no sort of proof, just as the highest technical 
excellence may be possible without creative power). The think- 
ing of our race, as human thought, certainly does not proceed 
from a power which is connected with the delicate fibres of our 
flesh and blood. Our thought, in so far as it is truly human, 
proceeds from the divine power to subject our flesh to our 
thought, and is to purely animal thinking as darkness is to 
light, contradictory, and the latter leads to inhumanity. 

Mans Innate Power of Effort. — Then Pestalozzi maintains 
that it is do incentive from without, no foreign will outside a man, 
which causes the development of his powers. It is his own will, 
his own innate power of effort which effects the awakening of 
his heart to feeling, his mind to thinking, or his physical powers 
to activity. 

Moral Power. — By means of his moral power man raises 
himself to the position of highest dignity of which his nature is 
capable, to the divine. 

Intellectual Power. — The intellectual power of our race 
Herbart regards as a power of the humanity of our nature, the 
component powers of which are those of contemplation, speech, 
and thought. The power of contemplation, if not unnatural, 
confused, or badly regulated leads a man under all circumstances 
to individual, clear presentations about the objects of his sur- 
roundings. Next comes the need of expression, and the gift of 
speech is immeasurably great, and is essential to the power of 
thought ; it may be regarded as the chief help whereby the 
knowledge won through contemplation may be made general 
and fruitful. 

Pestalozzi's Moral Teaching. — In agreement with Kant as 
well as with the philosophical idealism of later times, Pestalozzi 
is entirely opposed to Herbart from the point of view that the 
faculties and powers of the human soul do not spring from the 
influence of outward accident, but are rather innate and im- 



140 The Critics of Herbartianism 

manent, so that they constitute the proper inner essence of the 
soul. It is clearly seen that he regards the moral power as the 
highest, and as that which raises man above the animal and out- 
wards to the eternal and divine, and he also clearly shows to 
what extent moral freedom is not a matter of free-will, but a law 
of order and harmony. Thus, Nature must obey her laws. 
She has no will. But I must not obey the law within me, if 
I do not will it : in this I am my own judge and therefore 
a nobler creature than all nature beside. Man finds himself 
pledged in both the sensual and the mental worlds, — in the 
one through his body — in the other through his will. The laws 
of both are in essence the same, because both command order 
and harmony in the worlds ruled by them; natures gifted 
with this Knowledge obey the law at first because they ought, 
and then because they wish to do so. Still though Pestalozzi 
shows that the laws of nature and of the spirit are one and the 
same, he does not transport mechanical laws of nature to the 
mental world, and he claims that the power of abstraction is the 
very essence of thought power. 

The ' Soul ' as Viewed by Pestalozzi and Compared with 
Herbart's. — Vogel thinks Pestalozzi's ideas more suitable as a 
basis for the moral ordering of the world and a natural education, 
in just the way that Herbart's seem unsuitable. Herbart's soul 
seems a dead thing, without life and effort ; Pestalozzi's is the 
source of never-ending life. In the one case we have a soul 
which in its absoluteness neither requires nor is capable of 
development ; in the other, one whose impulses endeavour to 
evolve the powers slumbering within it to infinite perfection. 
The one is a mechanism, the other an organism ; the one repels 
all force from without as disturbance, the other in joyous and 
happy action grasps after what is beneficial for itself and its 
fellows. Scarcely greater opposites can be imagined, and they 
admit of no compromise ; the educationist may decide for him- 
self which is the most inspiring and to which of the two leaders 
he will entrust the soul of his pupil — Herbart or Pestalozzi. 

Educational Theories of Pestalozzi. — From the starting point 
that the development of the man himself, the masterpiece of 



Vogel 141 

creation, is the common need of humanity, Pestalozzi proceeds 
to distinguish sharply the training of the animal in man from the 
training of the human, and to enforce that when the highest 
perfection of the animal is attained this does not touch the 
boundary line of the evolution of the human. To satisfy man's 
nature only in regard to food, warmth, and rest is to make him 
sensual, selfish, and lazy. 

The object of all education is therefore the raising of man's 
nature from the sensuous selfishness of animal existence to the 
height of blessedness possible for him through the harmonious 
building up of his heart, mind and arb. The peace arising 
therefrom is the first requisite for all human development, and 
with Pestalozzi the only eternal foundation for this evolution 
of our nature towards humanity is Love, only through its sacred 
power does man rise to the divine that lies within him. The 
development of the man cannot come through a one-sided brain 
development; mechanical cleverness counts but little on the 
whole. Again it is : — 

Qui que tu sois, l'amour est ton maitre, 

II Test, il le fut, et il le doit etre. (Dumas.) 

Love is essentially the centre, and true love proceeds only from 
true faith, that of a trustful human child in his Divine Father. 

This basis of education naturally presupposes the free-will as 
the centre of all the powers, and thus the man must be educated 
to perform all his duties towards God, his neighbour and him- 
self willingly, readily, cleverly, through the activity of his faith 
and love ; he must be made intelligent for all the business of life 
and for every emergency, and accustomed to necessary activity 
and effort. 

Still, however important training for vocation and position in 
life may be, education must not make this its all-important 
object ; the perfection of man's whole human nature is its goal. 
The true nature of man is in itself neither good nor bad; its 
character depends upon whether it can freely develop according 
to its essence and destiny or not — no man ought therefore to say 
man is abject and depraved — it is only the men in whom the 
power and the right feeling of their human nature have be- 



142 The Critics of Herbartianism 

come annihilated through sensuality and negligence who are 
abject and depraved. Nature has done her work completely, 
man must do his ; she has placed within him in rich abundance 
the germs of all those powers which are necessary for our 
eternal and earthly destiny. What we have to do is to assist 
their natural development by bestowing upon them the en- 
lightened love, the trained intellect and art of our race. Human 
art is in this like the art of the gardener under whose care a 
thousand trees bloom and grow, but to none of which does he 
give the germs of development. A teacher plants no power 
in man, nor does he give life or breath to any power, he only 
takes care that no external force shall check or disturb their 
natural development, and must be guided in so doing by what 
centuries of experience have taught our race of human power. 

Again, though the educator begins with the individual and 
his special needs, he must embrace and have for his aim the 
whole of humanity ; the race, not the individual, is the cry of the 
Divine voice within us, in the hearing and following of which 
lies the true nobility of human nature ; man is not in the world 
for his own sake, but that he may perfect himself in the perfect- 
ing of his brethren. The art of training men is the highest, 
though the hardest, possible to man ; there is no calling on earth 
which calls for greater culture and greater skill and deeper 
knowledge of humanity and its needs. The means employed 
must always tend to strengthen and purify the moral-religious 
bond which unifies all man's powers. Faith must come about 
through faith, and thought through thought, not only through 
knowledge of what is believed and thought ; and love must come 
through love ; and all can come about only through the training 
of man's powers to the higher laws of his will ; a training which 
must be consistent for each individual with the degree of develop- 
ment to which he has already arrived. 

Tine Development of Power. — The natural development of 
each power comes through the use of the same, through work 
and industry — therefore the physical activity of our race is the 
true, divinely ordained means for the development of the human 
nature in man. Industry forms the intellect and gives force to 



Vogel 143 

the feelings of the heart, and in order that this development may 
proceed, encouragement is necessary, and in certain cases cor- 
rection ; hence Pestalozzi does not condemn corporal punishment, 
though he lays stress on the fact that the consistent daily and 
hourly conduct and example of those around them is the highest 
incentive for children — they cannot be kept in order by fear of 
corporal punishment, but should be moved to do right of their 
own free will out of gratitude and love, because it is right, and 
for the sake of their own advantage. 

The Moral Power. — Only as a moral being does man advance 
to perfection, and the educator must strive to awaken, nourish 
and strengthen moral and religious feeling in the child. This 
is effected first by the mother's sacred care, in the steady, quiet 
satisfaction of the child's physical needs, as this begets trust 
and love, the foundation of morality ; and man must love, trust, 
and obey man, before he loves, trusts, and obeys God. Moral 
instruction is not so much the Teacher's as the Parent's task. 
Man's struggle after perfection is the one thing, aided by Divine 
guidance, that is capable of destroying evil. 

The Mental Power. — This is entirely one of the humanity 
of our nature, and hence its development is especially the 
educator's goal. The child likes to think as much as he does 
to walk, to learn as much as to eat, if only his instruction 
is as well prepared as his food. To make the child feel " I can 
do something " is the teacher's special task, and the feeling one 
of the child's greatest rewards. 

The Science of Teaching. — This comprises three natural 
means : — 

Simple Observation : Memory and Application of what is 
Observed : Imagination. — The real value of human knowledge 
consists in this, that a man who knows a great deal and can 
apply it, must be able to harmonise more than another with his 
circumstances and to develop himself uniformly. 

Instruction therefore is Subordinate to Training. — Great 
simplicity should characterise the Teaching art, that is, all 
imparting of knowledge should start from the very simple, and 
lead by easy stages to what is difficult, keeping pace always with 



144 The, Critics of Herbartianism 

the growth of power in the pupil, always encouraging, never 
wearying him. The range of subjects should be neither too 
wide nor too narrow. None of us need all Knowledge. The 
form of instruction is valuable in so far as it arouses the inde- 
pendent action of the child. Only that which is in full harmony, 
mental, spiritual, and physical, with the individual, is for that 
individual really truth. Catechising, therefore, is a most natural 
form of instruction, and only such material should be chosen as 
can appeal to a child's mind and give him real pleasure and 
interest. Natural objects, pictures, and illustrations are most 
essential to the forming of clear ideas in a child's mind, and to 
his being able to express the same. Correct sense-impressions 
lead to knowledge. The art of Teaching lies in showing right 
relations and associations, and in strengthening these im- 
pressions, and the power to express the same. Independent 
imaginative work follows naturally. 

The Physical or Artistic Power. — Knowledge without the 
power to use it is a fatal gift to any man. The physical basis 
of the development of artistic power is instinct ; but art is 
needed in directing this development. Just as the theory and 
practice of form and number may be regarded as the gymnastics 
of the mental power, so the mechanical exercise of the senses 
and limbs is necessary for the development of the art power. 
Here, again, the germs of the power are in man, and the 
development of mechanical skill by simple exercises leading to 
more difficult ones consistent with the circumstances of the indi- 
vidual child is all that is needed, till practice leads to correct 
performance, and then to freedom and independence in any 
art. 

Unity of the Powers. — Again, the Moral, Mental, and Physical 
Powers are not contradictory, they are united by a sacred and 
organic inner bond towards a common end, i.e., the evolution 
towards perfection of the humanity in man, and all art in train- 
ing must work towards this goal, the ennobling and satisfaction 
of our human and Divine nature. Only that which lays hold 
of the man, and satisfies his heart, mind, and hand is truly 
advantageous to him. If one part suffers, all suffer with it, 



Vogel 145 

Harmonious development is the key-note of Pestalozzi's theories^ 
and though no one man can be said yet to have attained thereto, 
he would have us " press forward, if haply we may do so ". 

The Science and Art of Education : Herbart and Pestalozzi. 
— Vogel points out to us that those who wish to build a science 
of education on experience should be very careful to observe 
how many times it is necessary to try the same experiment with 
different gradations, before a resultant average can be obtained 
which is capable of giving a theory and a working hypothesis in 
the domain of those sciences, so essentially founded on experience, 
as physics and chemistry. Education, as a science, must be 
distinguished from the art of Education, for science is the orderly 
arrangement of precepts which constitute an harmonious whole, 
and in which the results are derived from axioms, and axioms 
from first principles ; while an art is the sum total of exercises 
which must be united to bring about a certain object. Science, 
therefore, demands guidance from theorems proceeding from 
philosophic thinking, while Art demands constant action cor- 
responding with the result to be attained ; and the application of 
Science to Art is necessary before entering upon that action by 
means of which the final artistic result is to be attained. Never- 
theless one must not expect to turn out an infallible master of 
any art by following a specific scheme of rules arrived at by such 
preparation, nor must one demand from it infallible directions 
as to treatment. One must trust one's power of discovery suf- 
ficiently to be able to do the right thing at the right moment, 
and if this be the case in mere technical art so much more is it 
so in that art of all arts, Education. Here, perhaps, individual 
actions of the trainer may seem insignificant, but the whole 
tenor of his treatment is of vital importance. 

Great Insight into Human Nature Necessary. — Pestalozzi 
compares child-training to the gardener's art. Herbart rather 
calls attention to the distinctions between them dependent on 
the complexity of child nature. We feel the first requirement 
of the educator to be an exact knowledge of human nature, not 
within its ordinary limitations, but in its infinite capacity for 
development, and with this an understanding of the relations of 

10 



146 The Critics of Herbartianism 

all kinds of knowledge to the various interests of humanity, and 
a tactful application of the same. 

Government of Children. — In the government of children the 
great consideration is the training of the Will, so that it may not 
be the mere creature of wild impulses leading first one way and 
then another. Force may have present results, but true training 
makes for the discipline of the future. The best training is that 
of Love and Persuasion ; sympathy is a potent factor, and also 
brings about the best present results, for though willing is more 
important than knowing, it has its root in thought and in in- 
struction, which incites mental activity and interest, through 
presentations which depend, to a great extent, on experience 
and environment. 

Foundations of Educational Systems. — -These should be based 
on Ethics and Psychology, and if on the latter, Herbart's is 
wrong. Logically, the idea of training does not enter into his 
system, and yet he contradicts himself, for to carry out his 
system premises the existence of soul powers. The chief aim of 
education is, according to Pestalozzi, the elevation of our nature 
from the sensual selfishness of our animal self, to humanity 
through Faith and Love, while Herbart would inculcate Virtue or 
Morality. But it seems to us that Virtue and Morality are to 
Faith and Love as the stream to the source, as effect to cause, 
and as greater abstractions they may have less soul life and less 
power to excite Will. Spontaneous free-will must be premised if 
humanity is to be raised ; Faith and Love make all things possible. 
Herbart practically denies the spontaneity of Will ; and yet the 
human Will must be raised to resignation and to sacrifice for 
truth and right through Faith and Love. Pestalozzi holds that 
education can only draw out from the mind what is already 
there. It can arouse already existing powers, it cannot implant 
them. 

Herbart denies to the man every faculty and every power 
which animals and plants possess. According to him the mind 
of man is constructed in accordance with outer circumstances, 
and it is thus the task of art to take care that this construction 
will follow lines which will cause the mind to correspond to the 



Satlwiirk 147 



purpose of man's being. As he makes the soul entirely without 
spontaneity, he renders it like any other machine, capable only 
of elaborating what it receives. It certainly adds to the responsi- 
bility of the educator, since in accordance with this theory it rests 
entirely in his hands whether the pupil becomes a reasoning per- 
son or a wild animal. This may be the logical conclusion from 
Herbart's psychology, yet, as a working hypothesis, his system 
has much to recommend it. The training of strength and breadth 
of Character, through many-sided Interest, is indeed the pre- 
eminent goal of the educator. Life itself, it may be urged, 
affords here and there opportunity for the unfolding of the 
human-divine powers, without the necessity for specific guidance, 
but it cannot be denied that a proper guidance, with regularly 
planned method, is a far more certain means for the accom- 
plishment of the desired end, or should, at least, work hand in 
hand with life. 

We owe an incalculable debt to Pestalozzi as the pioneer who 
penetrated to the profoundest depth of human nature, and laid 
bare its psychological organism, as well as the imperishable 
foundations upon which rest the means through which its 
powers may be developed. His Teacher and Pupil are friends, 
while Herbart's are rather Master and Scholar. Perhaps in 
practice both relations are needed, and instruction must fill the 
gaps left by experience and environment, and ensure concen- 
trated attention and many-sided development. 

SECTION VII. 

SALLWURK. 
(1887.) 

Reference. 
Sallwiirk. Gesinnimgs-unterricht und Kulturgeschichte. Beyer und 
Sohne (Langensalza), 1887. 

Dr. E. von Sallwurk was the author of an important book, 
published anonymously in 1880 under the title of Herbart und 



148 The Critics of Herbartianism 

seine, Jilnger (Herbart and his disciples), which gave rise to ani- 
mated controversies between the extreme Zillerians and their 
critics. Other works followed in 1885 and subsequent years ; 
the most important of these is probably the one above. Sall- 
wiirk's own attitude is that of a moderate Herbartian severely 
critical towards Zillerian proposals. He is especially good in 
his treatment of the scientific foundations of the culture-stages 
doctrine. 

Character-forming Instruction (Gesinnungs-unterricht) may 
take various forms. 

(1) It may be pragmatic, making an attempt to provide the 
pupil with guidance and teaching for each contingency of life. 
But the worst of this method is that it deals largely with out- 
ward experience, whereas the child is a child and must be 
treated as such. 

(2) It may be organic, following the development of the 
presentation world of the pupil, and advancing strictly from 
simple to complex. 

(3) The third method may be called genetic, and is based on 
the maxim that the moral development of the individual 
imitates that of the race. Thus a course of instruction in 
accordance with general history would satisfy the needs of the 
child. But the advocates of this method have never yet proved 
the maxim upon which their method rests ; moreover, one 
questions whether they have succeeded, without too much arti- 
ficiality, in obtaining from history material for instruction which 
corresponds to the step-by-step development of the normal child. 

After dealing with " Character-forming Instruction" along 
pre-Herbartian lines, Sallwiirk proceeds to discuss the proposals 
of Ziller. 

Ziller' s most dangerous tendency was towards a hasty 
dogmatism. This is shown in his doctrine of culture stages 
as applied to the central matter provided for " Character- 
forming Instruction ". 

He proposes that after the early courses of fairy tales, Eobin- 
son Crusoe, etc., the children should be taught along two paral- 



Sallwiirk 149 



lei lines, profane history and sacred history ; German Sagas 
being taught along with the Patriarchs ; the Niebemngen along 
with the Judges ; the founders of the German kingdom (Henry I., 
etc.) along with the Jewish Kings ; the Eeformation along with 
Jesus and the Prophets ; the War of Freedom along with the 
Apostles ; and the recent re-erection of the German Empire 
along with the Lutheran Catechism. Meanwhile for the higher 
schools Greek thought should be treated in a similar way ; thus 
the Odyssey would be taught simultaneously with the Niebe- 
mngen and the Judges, while Herodotus would accompany 
Kings, etc. 

How much of this scheme is Herbart's own ? Very little ; 
only those portions which deal with the classics (Odyssey) and 
with Eobinson Crusoe. Practically speaking, the scheme is 
Ziller's. Herbart himself put Thucydides after the younger 
Xenophon, thus reversing the historical order and showing 
how little he believed in the " culture-stages " doctrine. 

The connecting together of secular and profane history may 
be morally useful as showing the advance of inner ethical ideas, 
but "concentration" would suffer, and, indeed, historical truth. 

Let us consider Ziller's arguments. The child, we are told, 
has to begin in the child world of the fairy tales ; here he gets 
to know single things in their concrete forms. Then, in passing 
through the Eobinson Crusoe stage (the conquest of natural 
hindrances) he learns the necessity for mutual help and for 
authority. Next he becomes like the tribal dependents of the 
'patriarchal age. Activity springs up ; the powers of each indi- 
vidual in the community are valued and used ; national form is 
assumed (Judges period). There comes now a recognition of an 
ethical order among the free individuals of the State (Kings 
period). Then out of obedience there springs up love for the 
highest authority ; Christ appears and tries to bring God's king- 
dom on the earth. 

Ziller tries to show the significance of this scheme from the 
point of view of Herbart's five moral ideas. But inasmuch as 
these ideas, however valuable, were deduced dialectically and 
not historically, they do not really correspond to Ziller's stages. 



150 The Critics of Herbartianism 

He correlates " Inner Freedom " with his fairy-tale period ; 
" Perfection " (Vollkommenheit) with his Kobinson Crusoe 
period ; and Benevolence with his patriarchal period. All this 
is fantastic. If any one idea is first, it is that of " Eight or 
Law," for we come into the world as members of society. How- 
ever, Ziller, taking the three primary ideas and the five social 
ideas, obtained eight in all, and imagined that these corre- 
sponded to his eight culture stages. 

Again, though he speaks of " culture stages," his teaching 
course is really determined by one kind of culture only, namely, 
ethico-religious, and even that along Christian lines only, except 
so far as, in highest schools, the classics are studied. Surely 
art, science, etc., must be considered. 

The child, before entering school, is already in part familiar 
with Christianity. How is it possible, then, to make a child 
" live through " the pre-Christian stages? 

Ziller's followers have by no means slavishly adhered to his 
plan. Thus Willmann admits errors in the master's scheme, 
and Staude declares it to be a piece of audacity to assume that 
between the ages of six and fourteen the child passes through 
eight apperception stages, each stage demanding certain ma- 
terial and no more. It is inconceivable that the eight years 
passed in the elementary school should have such a philosophic 
basis. 

Again, Staude criticises Ziller for leaving it uncertain whether 
children do in any case pass through the eight stages, or whether 
this only happens if we arrange our instruction properly. He 
also points out that the various stages cannot be definitely marked 
off from each other, and criticises the importance attached to 
the Judges period and to the periods subsequent to Christ ; the 
time devoted to the study of Christ must be increased. But 
the fundamental weakness in the works of men like Ziller, 
Staude, and Eein, is that they never prove that the assumed 
congruence between racial and individual development really 
exists. 

O. W. Beyer (Ueber die Naturivissenschaften in der Erzie- 
hungsschule) is an earnest writer upon the question of natural 



Sallwiirk 151 



science teaching. He is convinced that the above-mentioned 
congruence exists ; embryology is a witness. But Ziller never 
thought of applying the culture-stages doctrine to the teaching 
of any subject except historical ones. Beyer goes further. 

He calls attention to such facts as children's love of wandering, 
hunting, looking after animals, and so forth. He regards these 
as indications that the child is reproducing the hunting, nomadic 
and other primitive stages of development. In this connection 
school excursions, school gardens, school workshops, etc. (the 
last bear closely on the later civic stage) are important. There 
is something of the vagabond and of Eobinson Crusoe in every 
child. 

Accordingly Beyer proposes that an attempt be made to follow 
the different development-stages of human work, the making 
and preparation of food, the discovery of fire, etc. No doubt 
these stages were vastly important for the race. But have they 
any significance for the individual ? Is there any close relation 
between them and his mental development, his presentational 
life ? Is there really any mental stage in the individual corre- 
sponding to the discovery of fire ? 

Beyer thinks there is. He identifies the culture stages (stage 
of the use of fire, etc.) with the conditions of adaptation in Dar- 
win's scheme, and believes that the earlier stages have left 
especially deep traces, because of their length. But is this so ? 
Have the various culture-stages (hunting, agriculture, etc.) ever 
really modified the bodily structure ? x And was there ever any 
precise separation between the stages ? 

Just as Beyer has applied the culture-stages doctrine to science 
teaching, another Zillerian, Menard, has applied it to art. 

Examination of the Scientific Foundations of the Culture- 
stages Doctrine. — Ziller has never applied his doctrine to the 
entire realm of human development, only to the ethical. But 
surely there would be a certain charm in generalising the maxim, 
and, drawing inspiration from it, to carry on the work willed by 
Providence. Let us, however, examine it. 

1 Here Sallwiirk touches on the great problem whether habits are trans- 
mitted to offspring. 



152 The Critics of Herbartianism 

The culture-stages doctrine implies that racial development is 
a real development, i.e., a progression from a lower to a higher 
stage. But evolution is not always upw r ard, though it is always 
in the direction of adaptation to environment. Organs have to 
become adapted to new conditions. Some blind animals possess 
rudimentary eyes in their early stages of existence ; is the dis- 
appearance of the eyes an advance ? Surely not, in the sense of 
the culture stages doctrine, though in the sense of adaptation to 
conditions it is an advance. Culture is a question of the favour- 
able or unfavourable relations in which the surrounding material 
world places those wrestling with it ; culture itself may not alter 
the bodily or mental organisation ; thus previous culture stages 
may not have been handed down to the human beings of the 
present day, and therefore education need not pay any attention 
to such previous stages. Only that which exists in the present 
conditions of culture, or that which is represented in present-day 
instincts, can be attended to by education. Moreover, the human 
race passed through many stages previous to the historic ones 
— hunting, nomadic, etc. — but we cannot trace them. Again, 
human culture has not been an uninterrupted advance : it has 
repeatedly doubled back or retrogressed ; or an older culture,. it- 
self incapable of further advance, may have fertilised a younger 
culture. Thus oriental culture has influenced Greek rather than 
developed continuously along its own lines. 

True, the development of the individual does not always pro- 
ceed along one definite line ; but we must not, for this reason, imi- 
tate the involved and perplexing procedure of racial development. 

Enough has been said in connection with Beyer's proposals 
to show that we must not imitate the forms of material develop- 
ment, for these forms (the use of fire, etc.) merely demonstrate 
incidentally a mental and ethical advance, but are in themselves 
of no educational significance, however great their significance 
for the race as a whole. 

Let us proceed to consider inner development. 

Intellectual Development. — There are great difficulties here for 
the culture- stages theory ; man was once quite devoid of science; 
are we to imitate this stage ? The question of speech would 



Sallwiirk 153 



offer an extraordinarily good field for study ; but even with 
advanced peoples, speech is still primitive and cannot express 
logical distinctions very clearly ; thus in English, concretes and 
abstracts are not completely distinguished, and in most lan- 
guages there is a confusion between post hoc and propter hoc 
(cf., the particles since, quum, nachdem, puisque). 

Even if science could give us an account of man's intellectual 
development, education must not copy it, unless, with Eousseau, 
we wish to lead out of instead of into culture. Surely we shall 
teach European writing, not hieroglyphics ; developed word- 
forms, not primitive roots. 

Ethical Development. — In the realm of ethical thought there 
has been no change in the moral ideas, though much change in 
their application (marriage, etc.); from the first dawn of culture 
man seems to have had them. Thus family life, even in the 
crudest form, develops all the ideas. 

Ziller's strange notion of developing the moral ideas one after 
the other (Inner Freedom at the fairy-tale stage, Vollkommenheit 
at the Crusoe stage, and so on) would involve a dissection of 
morality ; nay, the pupils would for a long time live without 
morality, for Inner Freedom involves insight into all the other 
ideas, and therefore cannot exist alone. It is clear that the 
simple ideas cannot and ought not to develop step by step ; and 
further, that the deduced social relations are beyond the capacity 
of juniors, so that the imaginary actions the latter are directed 
to consider would be fatal to earnestness. 

Further Criticisms of Ziller's Plan. — The child's nature is 
rooted in the present. To insist that the child should live 
through past stages is to rely on superficial views of the culture- 
stages doctrine, and is, indeed, difficult to be justified by an Her- 
bartian, who is supposed to lay much stress on the present rela- 
tions of the pupils. 

Again, can we parallel sacred history with the real culture 
development of man ? The question culminates in this : Are the 
Protestant German Empire and the Lutheran Catechism neces- 
sarily the highest stage of human culture ? It is difficult here 
to share Ziller's optimism. 



154 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Again, Joseph, David, etc., are introduced to the pupil after 
Eobinson Crusoe has been accompanied over the world, and 
after questions like property, obedience, etc., have been intro- 
duced. In point of fact, Ziller puts Crusoe much too early, as 
some Zillerians admit.. 

The Zillerians criticise some of the Old Testament stories on 
various grounds, and substitute fairy tales for them in the first 
year. Thus the narratives of the Creation and Fall have to be 
withheld ; all sorts of limitations, reservations, and exclusions 
are proposed. But, in reality, if the Old Testament stories are 
taught simply and undogmatically they will be found suitable 
enough, and better than the fairytales ; and, indeed, these latter 
are altogether too childish for children who have entered school. 

We must not base extravagant hopes on the social culture of 
thirteen-year-old pupils who are still under home protection. 
We must undertake with them natural and remunerative tasks, 
and give them the right disposition to do their own appointed 
work ; to go beyond this will be a mistake. 



SECTION VIII. 
HUBATSCH. 

(1888.) 

'Reference. 

Hubatsch. Gesprache iiber die Herbart-Zillersche Padagogik. Kunzes 
Nactifolger, Wiesbaden. 

This violent attack upon Herbartianism is in the form of con- 
versations between a supposed juvenile enthusiast for the system 
and educationists of a disillusioned type. A certain vein of 
cynicism runs through this critique. Hubatsch is one of the few 
critics who see scarcely anything that is good in the proposals of 
the reformers, though he praises Her barf s strenuous consist- 
ency. 



Hubatsch 155 



Herbart's psychology is rejected even by men who cling to his 
pedagogy. It sounds impressive owing to its technical ter- 
minology. But the ruin of the psychology involves the ruin of 
the pedagogy, for the two are closely connected. Herbart's 
notion of a simple soul and of a presentational mechanism, with 
quantitative laws only, is purely fanciful. The experiments of 
Munk, and facts such as the loss of words for certain ideas, show 
that the brain is concerned in all thought, hence a system which 
ignores facts like the brain is doomed. A psychology suitable 
for pedagogy must not ignore experience, physiology, etc. 

Ziller indulges in prolix declamations but ignores important 
points. He was ignorant of man and of the world, yet he 
abused all opponents as fools. He said : " Woe to the schools 
where dexterities and knowledge are regarded as the highest 
goals to aim at, where ' practical ' interests, future usefulness, 
etc., are primarily regarded, and not the impulse to know and 
will ". Is this the utterance of a man who knows the world ? 
Do we live in a Utopia ? Ziller blames the schools for the 
absence of great men ; but surely if any schools were able to 
produce useless and helpless men those schools would be 
Ziller's, with their constant feeding of pupils on character- 
material. 

Following Herbart, Ziller recognised three classes of schools, 
Gymnasia, Burgerschulen, and Volksschulen. Each has to be 
transformed into an "educative school ". No doubt he admits the 
claims of the future vocation, etc., but he protests against the 
mixing up of ideals. The " chief classes," devoted to " educa- 
tion" proper, must be distinguished from the "subsidiary 
classes " devoted to professional training. But surely Ziller 
forgets human nature when he draws this sharp distinction, 
and, in point of fact, the " subsidiary classes " would prove the 
greatest attraction. 

Ziller has a dream of small school communities, unconnected 
with State, Town, or Church. How little he knows the world ! 
State control is daily increasing. 

He urges a diminution in school hours and in home lessons, 
and many breaks in the school lessons for open-air exercise. 



156 The Critics of Herbartianism 



This would be possible, he says, if teachers knew better how to 
employ the pupil's time ... if ... if ... if "concentra- 
tion," etc., were effected. Present-day teachers are no good ; 
they have no missionary zeal. But Ziller is wrong. Teachers 
must limit themselves to definite narrow goals. If wider cul- 
ture were possessed by them criticism would awaken, and there 
would be system no longer. 1 So long as large classes exist in 
schools, it is no good to " talk big ". Moral education must rest 
mainly on habit, rule, custom, obedience, religious instruction, 
influence, etc. Experience, activity, struggle are the best 
teachers. 2 

When you have obtained your finely educated teachers, ac- 
quainted with the latest researches, will they choose the 
lower schools ? Surely Ziller ought to have founded a philan- 
thropic "brotherhood". Pedagogical enthusiasm is rare; so 
long as teachers do their duty that is enough. A day has only 
twenty-four hours. How many thousand volumes must a man 
read before becoming a Zillerian teacher ? 

" Educative Instruction." Strange terminology, that of the 
Herbartians ! Preposterous claims to have discovered a 
" science " of pedagogy ! Pedagogy is merely an art with 
a narrow aim ; it picks up its knowledge from other sources. 
To give the name of science to a pedagogy founded on the doc- 
trine of a presentational-mechanism — a doctrine which ignores 
the rich life of the soul, its secret impulses, the thousand riddles 
of the world — is monstrous ! 

Do not all educators try to educate through Instruction ? 
The Zillerians answer, " Only in a chance way. You tried to 
cultivate the Understanding, the Taste, the Imagination, etc., 
but you forgot that Will is the one supreme goal ; you should 
aim at creating Virtue and Christian Love, and the Kingdom of 
God on earth." But is education impossible, then, with Jews, 
Moslems, etc. ? It was Ziller who added the religious notion 

1 In other words, Hubatsch pleads for a narrow, brutal professionalism 
without ideals. 

2 Yes, and how many pupils succumb ? The need of Instruction is the 
great Herbartian message, a far more valuable one than that of Hubatsch. 



Hubatsch 157 



to Herbarfc's system and claimed that Christianity alone in- 
cludes all that is humanly good. He rejected French and also 
various classical authors (Horace) as not truly educative ; but 
surely this is pure fanaticism ; all men of culture must know 
French, Horace, etc. 

" Action depends on the circle of thought," say the Herbar- 
tians. This is really Socrates redivivus. The doctrine is wrong. 
Man has desires, inclinations, etc. It is no good to deny inborn 
activities, or to call them purely " formal ". Darwinism and the 
inductive method show that " faculties" must be assumed, such 
as no presentations can invert. When Dickens described pure- 
minded children amid squalor and vice, was he wrong ? Ziller 
and Herbart are really in conflict over this question ; Ziller prac- 
tically admits " faculties ". 

The relation between " many-sidedness " and Virtue is not 
clear. Surely a one-sided person may be virtuous, and vice 
versa. " Yes," says Herbart, " but Interest must be awakened 
if Instruction has to bear on Virtue. Moreover, morality is 
really impossible without intelligence, for the circle of thought 
limits everything." " But surely many-sided Interest is often 
connected with self-love, pride, etc." " No," says Herbart, 
"the Interest is not, in such cases, genuine." " Eeally," re- 
sponds the critic, "what about Voltaire, Bacon, Cicero, Seneca?" 

Christianity lays stress on Faith and Love, not on Knowledge 
and many-sided Interest. Where is the real connection between 
the latter and Virtue ? 

Interest, say the Herbartians, " is a protection against pas- 
sions," which often spring from narrowness of mind ; it is a 
means of " help in the affairs of life," and it is a means of 
"safety amid the storms of fate," as opening up new paths. But 
(says the critic) a owe-sided Interest is often more satisfactory. 
There are many gradations between stupidity and many-sided 
Interest. 

Herbart denies that true Interest is of the nature of Desire. 
It is, he says, a peaceful thing, and not an impatient " pressing 
forward ". But (says the critic) such Interest is neither fish nor 
flesh. And, in point of fact, some of Herbart's six classes of In- 



158 The Critics of Hcrbartianism 

terest are " peaceful," some are not ; his whole classification is 
illogical. "Speculative" interest is not "peaceful," as "aes- 
thetic " is. Some of the interests are interests in definite 
objects ; others in relations. Again, religious interest easily 
passes over into a Feeling (of Fear, Hope, etc.). 

Then the "concentration" and "culture-stages " doctrines are 
of dubious value, and scarcely found in Herbart's own works. 
They rest on bad psychology or partial analogies. There is no 
history of mankind in general, only of nations. Fables are pro- 
ducts of advanced not primitive culture ; primitive man regarded 
animals as enemies, whereas the fables lay stress on the unity of 
nature, and really spring from a time when animals had already 
been- tamed. Sleeping princesses, etc., were no part of primi- 
tive man's world. He thought mainly of the dreadful, vast 
forces of nature. It is impossible to extract morals out of 
Marchen. Moreover, schools have to teach reality, and the 
imagination must not be over- stimulated. 

Again, though " Eobinson Crusoe " is a splendid story for 
children, suggesting self-power, stimulating imagination (how to 
act in hour of need), sympathy, etc., yet the story does not re- 
present any one stage of development. Men did not make 
clothes, etc., nor live alone after Eobinson's fashion. He al- 
ready had the ideas of civilisation in his mind. How different 
the child of eight ! At no stage ought we to make the story the 
centre of instruction, the story brings forward foreign and excep- 
tional scenery. But the story is an excellent one for reading at 
a certain age. 

Others of Ziller's stages are equally dubious. The Odyssey 
stage is said to correspond to that of navigation ; doubtless selec- 
tions from this poem are useful, but not as the centre of instruc- 
tion. What a medley Ziller's material is, animal fables, modern 
Robinson, ancient patriarchs, Greek heroes, etc. ! Many of the 
" stages " (the Livy stage, the Anabasis stage, etc.) may be use- 
ful in school, but have only very superficial parallels in the race. 
The child has parents whom it imitates ; how differently did the 
race learn ! Most of the Zillerian parallels and connections, 
e.g., between Greek and Jewish history are equally artificial. 



Hubatsch 159 



How absurd, also, to begin with geography of Asia (Ararat, 
etc.) ! We should begin at home. 

The great "Interest" doctrine! The Herbartians make In- 
terest an end, not a mere means. It must rest on involuntary 
attention, itself favoured by Begierung, and resting on sensible 
intensity as well as on contrast, newness, expectation, etc. But, 
says the critic, what is . the first germ of Interest ? How can 
Interest be generated merely out of presentations, apart from 
any central ego ? The Herbartians say, " Interest arises when 
presentations come forward freely ; without this freedom there 
may still be attention, but of a forced kind ". In point of 
fact the whole mathematical theory of presentations, their inter- 
actions, etc., is so obscure as to ruin the doctrine of Interest 
which rests on it. In its essence it is materialistic or atomistic. 
But presentations are not atoms ; they are much more complex, 
and cannot be treated as homogeneous. A tone and the Eoman 
Empire cannot be treated as alike ; some presentations are highly 
complex ; concepts, too, are peculiar ; yet Herbart lumps all these 
together as presentations. 

Again, Herbart lays great stress on primitive and apperceptive 
attention ; but whence comes the agency in this ? He is com- 
pelled to admit the necessity for voluntary attention ; here we 
have the agent, the Will. Surely this factor is important. 
Attention is a function of the Will. It may be voluntary or 
involuntary. It is this Will that explains everything. But 
Herbart only brings it on the scene at the very end of the series 
— Attention, Interest, Will. There is with him no original 
Will. According to him, out of primitive attention there arises, 
by a storing up of presentations, apperceptive attention ; out of 
this finally emerges Interest. But why not reverse the process, 
and say that the living will-power of the soul shows itself in 
impulses, interest, etc. ? The Will is the presupposition, not the 
result of Education ; we must work upon the Will by presenting 
to it suitable objects for arousing Interest. Interest presupposes 
Will, not vice versa. 

The Herbartian emphasis upon immediate interest and the 
partial depreciation of mediate interest overlooks the fact that 



160 The Critics of Herbartianism 

we cannot gather grapes from thorns ; we must take men as we 
find them. Happy if we can awaken even mediate interest. 
To say, " Don't interest to teach, but teach to awaken Interest," 
is sophistry. The teacher can only awaken Interest by being 
interesting. How can you awaken an interest in Latin declen- 
sions except by first conveying the impression that it is some- 
thing fine, mighty, worthy, etc., to know Latin? But this is 
mediate Interest. 

Again, Herbart admits that Interest depends on the one side 
on natural capacity which cannot be created. But if so, many- 
sided Interest is unnatural. He and Ziller compare education 
to an imaginary process in which an angular body gradually 
approximates to the spherical form by the excitation of many- 
sided Interest. But the illustration will not serve. Either the 
angular body is alterable or not. If unalterable, many-sided 
Interest has no influence ; if alterable, the individuality vanishes. 
"It is alterable," say the Zillerians, " but mainly so in youth, 
and the difficulty of alteration increases with age ; hence the 
importance of Education." They tell us that all must be 
amateurs in everything, virtuosi in one department. But all 
cannot be amateurs in everything ; individuality prevents it. A 
theory which professes to unite individuality with many-sided 
Interest is so absurd as to be impervious to attack. 

No doubt Herbart contends that many-sided Interest is a foe 
to fickleness as well as to one-sidedness, and he lays stress on 
Absorption (Vertiefung) as well as Eeflection (Besinnung). But 
Absorption really presupposes Interest, and this depends on 
innate powers. One man likes Mathematics, another Languages, 
etc. 

The Goal of Education. — This is, according to Ziller, the 
forming of ethico-religious personalities according to the ideal 
of the Kingdom of God. But a transcendent goal like this will 
not do. When parents send their children to school what do 
they expect ? Surely that the children be made into useful and 
capable persons. Education only deals with the preliminary 
part of life, the part before independence is reached. The 
Herbartian goal may be very good, but only for adults. It is 



Hubatsch 161 



no good to rave against existent schools. x\ll their attempts 
correspond to definite needs that have grown up. We must 
be practical people. The age will not stand mere " culture 
ideals ". Education has several distinct tasks. 

" No," say the Herbartians, " Instruction must not be separ- 
ated from Education, Knowledge from Morality. Instruction 
must serve Education; it must create Virtue." But this is a 
great mistake. One goal is not enough. There must be as 
many goals as there are directions of human activity. Moral 
and intellectual Education are two different things, 1 and the 
latter is far more effective than the former, for no Education 
can wash a Moor white. Moral action rests on impulses deeply 
buried ; the teacher is not responsible for them ; if he were we 
should punish not the criminal but his teacher. 2 

"No," says Herbart, "action springs out of the circle of 
thought." But character cannot be altered so easily. 

"Formal Culture." — Apart from the rousing of aesthetic and 
other Interest, and the formation of a " circle of thought," 
Herbart despised languages, mathematics, etc. But formerly 
people believed that the study of the classics was a fine mental 
gymnastic, a fine training in logic, in fact fine " formal culture ". 
So also with mathematics. But the Herbartians contend that 
these subjects must not be treated in independence. Thus these 
men encourage scattered, superficial thinking, and the tearing 
apart of what belongs together. The true principles of language 
and mathematics are not learnt. Note the superficial connec- 
tions established by Zillerians ! 

History. — The Herbartians rightly lay great stress on this 
subject, but mainly because of its moral aspects. But this view 
of the subject will conduce to the encouragement among children 
of premature judgments upon characters. A sound judgment 
upon historical characters demands severe abstraction. Far 
better use common life as moral material. 



1 Elsewhere Hubatsch says that there are three aims to be kept in view : 
(1) moral ; (2) intellectual ; (3) professional. 

2 In other words, the great Herbartian message is of no value whatever. 



1 62 The Critics of Herbartianism 

The new pedagogy uses force with its material. It is like 
a French garden in which nothing is allowed to grow up 
naturally. Language is subordinated to History ; Mathematics 
to Nature - Knowledge. But formerly we thought that the 
hardest subjects were the best ; the Herbartians put the easiest 
in the seat of honour. 

Herbart seems constantly to be thinking of home education ; 
here there is some sense in talking of analytical Instruction, etc., 
for the soul of the one pupil is an open book to the tutor. 
Herbart at times distinctly depreciates the value of the school. 
How remote his ideas from modern conditions ! 

Then the "formal steps". Comenius urged the importance 
of the first, as also of others. The Zillerians often treat the 
material with violence, and there is danger that the pure image 
of the object studied may be erased owing to premature com- 
parisons with other objects. Let the teacher ensure clear 
Anschauung, and not trust too much to words and " steps ". 

Analysis is the main thing ; synthesis is understood of itself ; 
the third step (Association) is only valuable if we are aiming at 
some inductive result; so with the other steps, they are not 
always necessary. Herbart never intended that the " steps " 
should be always employed. But Ziller has insisted on this, 
and has even invented " teaching units ", l There must be more 
consideration of the individual peculiarities of subject and pupil. 
Again, the fifth step (Application) should often be the third ; it is 
absurd to use comparisons until the material itself is familiar. 

1 Dt. Findlay prefers the word "section" for the "teaching unit" of 
Ziller. 



Drews 163 

SECTION IX. 

DREWS. 

(1890.) 

Preference. 
Drews. Die Kateclieseund das Lehrverfahren der Herbartianer. Yelhagen 
und Klasing (Bielefeld and Leipzig). 

This brief critique is directed against the Zillerian policy of depre- 
cating the catechetical or questioning method. The author, who, 
however, is not blind to the merits of his opponents, attempts to 
show (what ought surely to be in no need of proof) that the 
method may have a legitimate place in school work. 

It is at first sight strange that the Herbartians should make 
this attack. For the two parties are at one in their objection to 
mere "learning by heart," in their approval of a thorough 
working-in of material, and in their ideal way of regarding the 
work of education. 

Doubtless the catechetical method was established in pre- 
psychological days, and needs to be looked at in a new light. 
Still, there is no need to follow the Zillerians in their policy of 
wholesale condemnation. 

We agree with the Herbartians that our Instruction must act 
on the Will, and we need not here quarrel with them as to 
how far the influence of the Instruction can extend. Neither 
need we quarrel with them as to their doctrine of many-sided 
Interest, which, after all, is not very different from the doctrine 
of the " harmonious development of all faculties ". " All 
faculties " ; this is a just protest against mere memorising. 
The two views may differ fundamentally in their philosophical 
foundations, but there is no conflict in practice. All intelligent 
parties wish to make teaching " heuristic," that is, to arouse the 
mental activity and independence of the pupil. The catechetical 
method really arose out of a desire to get rid of mere me- 
morising. The example of Socrates was followed, and attempts 



164 The Critics of Herbartianism 



made to educe the unknown from the known, a procedure only 
possible when the " known " already contains the germ of the 
" unknown," and impossible of application to subjects which 
rest on experience. This, in reality the catechetical method, 
conforms to Ziller's own requirements. 

The Herbartian terminology is new, but the facts it stands for 
have long been known. Knowledge is for life, not for school. 
We must begin with Anschauung (Intuition or Observation), 
and go on to Conception ; we must proceed from particulars to 
generals. Alike in the catechetical and in the Herbartian pro- 
cedure this is recognised, and likewise a final stage, that of 
Application. The catechetical method itself is not to blame if, 
in religious teaching, this valid principle is not recognised ; the 
fault lies with tradition and authority. 

Ziller divided Anschauung into two stages, and Abstraction 
into two also. But there is no new discovery in this. Still, the 
Herbartians can teach us something here, especially with regard 
to history and religion, subjects in which there are often given 
too few sense-impressions. Ziller's formal steps must be used 
with great discretion. 

Ziller proposed that history should first be read from books, 
in order that a grasp of the whole story might be acquired ; that 
then the history should be gone through again, this time from 
the point of view of geography and the history of culture ; and 
that then finally the psychological, ethical, and religious side of 
the narrative should be considered in the course of a third 
perusal. But Dorpfeld is surely right in claiming that the oral 
teaching of new matter is better than acquisition from books. 

The catechetical method has doubtless been too abstract, and 
has not paid sufficient attention to Anschauung, and to number 
of instances. The formal steps have the advantage of not 
overlooking anything. But they occasionally verge on the 
unnecessary ; thus, the third and fourth stages lie so close 
together that they scarcely need to be distinguished ; com- 
parison of several objects and the grasping of the common 
features are so closely connected that to make of them two 
distinct stages would conduce to weariness. It is right enough 



Drews 165 



to compare the conflict between Gregory VII. and Henry IV. 
of Germany with that between Samuel and Saul (" Association" 
stage); but a further stage ("System") is scarcely called for. 
On the other hand, the fifth stage (" Application ") is quite 
suitable, though when cases of " imaginary action " are being 
considered, it is important that these cases be not too remote, 
otherwise the procedure degenerates into mere babble. In 
sum, the catechetical method may well make a discreet use of 
the formal steps. 

The Zillerians do not attack questioning per se, for they 
approve of a method of discussion or disputation (question and 
answer). What they object to in the catechetical method is 
that, being a method logically developed and working towards 
a goal chosen by the teacher, the procedure is artificial, and 
the answers of the children spurious. It is this logical sequence 
which the Zillerians attack, as a sequence only understood by 
the teacher, not by the pupil himself. All acts of will are 
directed to a goal, but there is here no goal before the pupil. 
The Zillerians, therefore, rightly contend that every lesson must 
have its goal clearly known from the first, and advocates of the 
catechetical method may learn something from them. 

Another objection is that the catechetical method does not 
take account of the mental condition of the individual child. It 
is the teacher's course of thought that is followed. Ziller's plan, 
on the other hand, is for the teacher only "formally" to lead 
the talk, entering in when there is confusion and hesitation. 

But this objection is somewhat exaggerated. A good teacher 
will, during his catechetical procedure, allow children to discuss 
various points: "What do you think of that?" he will ask. 
But it is doubtful whether there is any need of so minute a 
consideration of each child's individual nature as the Zillerians 
suppose. Experience decides here ; and so long as children are 
zealous and interested the method cannot have been unsuccess- 
ful. Ziller under-estimates the rapidity and agility of the child's 
mental processes, and his method of discussion or disputation 
would really be one of laborious weariness. 

In short, the Zillerians should not break with the past, but 
rather build upon it, and improve it. 



1 66 The Critics of Herbartianism 

SECTION X. 

CHRISTINGER. 
(1895.) 

Reference. 
Christinger. Friedrich Herbart' s Erziehungslehre und ihre Fortbilder 
bis auf die Oegenwart, nach den Quellschriften dargestellt und beurteilt. 
Sohulthess, Zurich, 1895. 

The above, by a Swiss educationist who claims to be a 
"neutral" in the Herbart-Ziller controversy, is one of the 
sanest and most judicious works with which the writer is 
acquainted. 

It deals biographically with Herbart and Ziller ; discusses the 
contributions of each to pedagogical science ; passes judgment 
without any signs of prejudice ; gives information relative to the 
other leading exponents of Herbartianism ; touches briefly upon 
its chief opponents ; and finally gives a few specimen lessons 
on Herbartian lines. 

Critique of Herbart's Pedagogy. — It does not pay sufficient 
attention to physical education. We must regard man's nature 
as a whole. 

Eemale education has to some extent special ends — narrower 
than those of man — in view. Herbart scarcely recognises this. 

Education for the practical duties of life is neglected. Unless 
children are successful in the struggle for existence their mental 
and moral life cannot thrive. Herbart inadequately recognises 
the poverty and effort which are the lot of the poor. 

Instead of aiming at "many-sided balanced Interest" we 
must recognise that, for the sake of efficiency, a single interest 
must, as a rule, be allowed to predominate, though it may not 
exclude others. 

No doubt aesthetic judgments influence character and act as 
motives. But some natures are rougher than others, and cer- 
tainly there are two other things which influence character 



Christinger 167 



profoundly — self-interest and religion. Herbart recognises the 
force of religion, but not of Christianity in particular. He sees 
that a sense of humility is necessary, but scarcely thinks of 
making " children of God " inspired by a love of God. Nay 
he even hands over the richest province of instruction to 
theologians. 

One cannot admit that Herbart was ignorant of childhood ; he 
learnt more in the four years of his Steiger tutorship than many 
men would learn in a far longer time. But he was too far 
removed from the working classes and their cares ; his circle was 
the circle of the cultured. 

But his excellences outweigh his defects. No doubt Education 
has other aims than Virtue in the narrow sense ; still if we want 
one word to describe its aim " Virtue " is the best; it will then 
signify all human excellences of understanding and disposition. 
We must not only give knowledge, we must educate ; for mere 
knowledge leads to evil unless morality be uppermost. Herbart 
has convincingly shown how presentations come to the help of 
character, and how they are far more important than punish- 
ments, etc. But he never worked out thoroughly the question 
of habit. 

His plan of " formal steps " is also of imperishable value, 
though mechanical teachers may abuse it. 

Critique of Ziller. — Ziller had more practical experience than 
Herbart. He admitted the existence of innate dispositions — 
which Herbart tended to deny ; he urged the unity of moral 
and religious education, and regarded Jesus Christ as the ideal 
which we should place before us. Ziller's proposals were some- 
times right, sometimes wrong, but generally both. 

He was wrong when, for example, he deprecated preparing 
children for the tasks of practical life. 1 We must not neglect 
this, however great the stress we lay on character-forming. 

His schemes of small school-communities, and of schools for 
distinct social groups, were retrograde. 

In the following particulars he was partly right, partly wrong : — 



Except in the upper classes of schools. 



i68 The Critics of Herbartianism 



In substituting five "formal steps" for Herbart's four he 
was right ; but there is some danger of making the first step 
too lengthy or artificial. Still it is right to begin, as a rule, 
with analysis: "from known to unknown". But we cannot 
always state the goal of the lesson ; it would be a mere word 
to our pupils. Often it is best to give the concrete object before 
the name. 

As to "Concentration," Ziller was right in putting character- 
forming in the foreground. Let us give the best hours of the 
day to it, and let us throw light upon it from all departments of 
study. But we must not so use character-forming instruction 
as to deprive other departments of their own claims. If we 
teach arithmetic, geography, etc., in connection, e.g., with biblical 
history, the former subjects will be unjustly treated, and great 
gaps will be left in them. Moreover, the children will get tired 
if the same central material is served up daily. 

The fundamental idea of " culture stages " is right, but Ziller 's 
working-out is fantastical. It is not true that the epic fable first 
occupied the mind of man ; the religious myth was still earlier. 
Moreover, mankind as a race was never in Eobinson Crusoe's 
condition, with his advanced knowledge of civilisation. Further, 
neither the fables nor the story of Crusoe have such moral value 
as to be made a basis of " character-forming Instruction ". On 
the other hand, the life of Christ requires two years at least. 

In point of fact, the first " culture stage " (properly so called) 
was probably the one when men first began to care for the 
beautiful. Before this time they thought only of the necessary, 
and could scarcely be regarded as possessing culture at all. 
Later came care for the useful-^-the second " culture stage ; " 
later again, the stage of seeking truth ; still later, care for the 
Kingdom of God, the realisation of the moral ideal. But through 
the later stages the earlier ones still persist. 

Some pupils are more talented than others ; girls are quicker 
than boys ; thus the stages are run through more quickly in some 
cases than in others. 

Ziller is right in claiming that in schools only scientific facts — 
not hasty theories — should be taught. He is also right in urging 



Bergernann 169 



that pupils in the upper classes of a school should be trained for 
the definite professional duties of life. [Still, schools must 
" educate " ; that is Ziller's main contention.] 

Above all he is right in his goal. Education must be real ; 
must rouse activities ; must form character and power. Mental 
culture will not hurt morality, but will rather help it. The work 
of education is to implant many germs, not to let the child grow 
out of one, as Frobel supposed. 



SECTION XI. 

BERGEMANN. 
(1897.) 

References. 

(1) Die Lehre von den formalen und den Kultur-historischen Stufen und 
von der Koncentration im Lichte der unbefangenen Wissenschaft (Haacke, 
Leipzig, 1897). 

(2) Der entwickelnd-darstellende Unterricht, Neue Bahnen, 1897, p. 156. 

(3) Die Fabel vom Erziehenden Unterricht, Die Lehrerin, 1897, p. 306. 

The attainment of a certain degree of freshness in dealing 
critically with Herbartianism may be placed to the credit of 
Dr. Bergernann, of Jena. 

In the third of the above he dismisses " educative Instruc- 
tion " as a mere " fable". Herbart's psychology is exploded, 
and no longer are we able to identify Education with Instruction. 
There is realty no proportion between many-sided Interest and 
Intelligence on the one side, and Virtue or Morality on the 
other. Morality is only one aim of Education. Where is the 
connection between morals and mathematics ? 

What does science say ? Is human nature so simple that it 
can be brought under one formula ? Surely man is a product 
of at least three factors — heredity, environment, and individual 
variation ; and his mind is complex also, functioning in three 
ways — Presentation, Feeling, Will. Education is a part of one's 



i)o The Critics of Herbartianism 

environment, but there are the other two factors (heredity and 
variation) over which no control can be exercised. 

The first thing for the teacher to do is to know the innate 
constitution of his pupils. With regard to the three mental 
functions there may be great differences in different people. 
Presentation, Feeling, and Will do not stand in any relation to 
each other. Hence it is absurd to talk of the last two as being 
modifications of presentations. 

" Educative Instruction," the culture of the thought-circle so 
as to form character, is a fable. The teacher must look after 
Feeling and Will, as well as the thought-circle. In other words, 
he must train as well as teach. Teaching may give prudence, 
but cannot make men better. Morality cannot be taught. The 
main thing to look after in character-forming is Habit, and 
connected with this, reward, punishment, intercourse, and 
example. 1 

The Herbartians mix up the several distinct tasks of Educa- 
tion. Moral Education is different from intellectual. Action 
really springs out of the depths of Feeling, Impulse, and Will. 
These are independent of presentations. Herbartianism is a 
bad preparation for the hour of trial. What is the good of 
theoretical morality ? 

The second of the above productions deals with " developing 
presentative Instruction " which the Herbartians prefer to 
Instruction in the form of narrative. Pupils must be encouraged 
by gentle hints to build up the material. Thus they are pro- 
ductively active, instead of being mere recipients of information. 

But (asks Bergemann) is the method so very valuable after all? 
Surely, when a pupil listens to a teacher he must attend, and 
this is a form of mental activity. Moreover, he has to exercise 
his imagination actively in order to follow the teacher's account. 
Herbartians say that their method causes more pleasure than 

1 This argument means that Herbartianism is nonsense, and that the 
circle of thought has no influence on character. But surely it is not nonsense. 
Though Habit, etc., are important, they will only conduce to conservative 
Morality. Moral insight must be aroused, and this necessitates " teaching ". 



Bergemann 171 



the other; but surely this will depend on the teacher's tact. 
Both methods may be useful. 

For what subjects do the Herbartians use it ? Nature- 
knowledge, geography, history, poetry. 

But surely in the case of nature-knowledge it is far better to 
use concrete olives, or, at least, 'pictures, of olives, than to try to 
build up the notion of an olive through imagination ! 1 So in the 
case of geography and history we must use concrete experience, 
pictures, etc., as much as possible, otherwise we shall merely 
encourage lawlessness. 

But the method is useful in dealing with poetry, for here 
imagination may be allowed to have much free play, and facts 
are at a discount. 

The main question is, whether it is better to give to the pupil 
the image or to let him build it up for himself. The Herbartians 
say, " The latter, because in this way activity is roused ". But 
surely it is also roused when the child has to attend. The 
proposed method compels the child to attend to matter and form 
at the same time — too great a task. In fact, the proposed 
method, though not without its uses, can easily be overdone. 

The first of the above works is the most important. 

Bergemann holds that the Herbartians neglect formal educa- 
tion, and lay most stress upon heaping up knowledge. Surely 
we must develop the intellectual capacity as such, and here 
language, as connected with general notions, is of great im- 
portance. Similarly, it is important to cultivate the habit of 
attention. 2 

The "formal steps" are useful, but must not be used slavishly. 
It is right to give the goal of the lesson at the beginning. But 
the Herbartians ignore the value of repetition. 



1 Right. Pestalozzi and some modern Herbartians would here be at 
" daggers drawn ". 

2 Thus, while Herbart thinks highly of involuntary attention, Berge- 
mann lays more stress on voluntary, as having more significance for 
character-forming purposes. 



172 The Critics of Herbartianism 

The doctrine of " culture stages " is defective in many ways, 
though no doubt it represents a grain of truth. 

Man was once a cave-dweller. Does the child go through this 
stage of development ? If so, at exactly what age ? According 
to Ziller's scheme, the child passes in twelve months from the 
nomadic stage to the next, and when he has arrived at the age 
of fifteen he stands at the stage of present-day civilisation ! In 
fourteen years he has recapitulated the history of the race ! 

At the age of six he is at the fable stage. But this is no real 
stage of human progress at all, and if it were one, it would be 
far below the patriarchal. 

During the first six years (i.e., before he goes to school) he 
apparently makes no progress at all, while in the eight years of 
school life he passes through all the stages from remote antiquity 
to the present day ! 

How absurd to allow a child at the fable stage to read, write, 
and calculate, if this stage were a real one through which 
primitive man once passed ! The fables are devoid of moral 
value, and would also soon become wearisome. 

For the second school year the Zillerians prefer Eobinson 
Crusoe (excluding the Bible). This is to cast out Satan by 
means of Beelzebub. 

Is the parallelism doctrine really true ? Great men may 
invent wonderful doctrines, but, after all, science has to decide 
upon their truth. And science decides that the parallelism be- 
tween race and individual is run through mainly in the 
embryonic stage of the individual. As soon as the child is 
born he is ready to seize hold of. the modern world which lies 
around him ; he is not at some pre-historic cannibal stage. 
Hence, instead of the teacher trying to transplant the child back 
into a long-vanished past, he should begin with the concrete 
world, and only subsequently work back to past ages when the 
child's curiosity about them is aroused. The iHerbartians claim 
that the past is simpler and more fundamental than the present. 
Not so. The child lives in the present, acquires the speech of 
the present, learns about the persons, buildings, etc., of the 
present. Thus the present should be the starting point, and 



Linde 



173 



imagination must build on this. There must be no exaggerated 
stress on history; science has changed all views. 

Then as to " concentration ". This rests on false metaphysics, 
and does not really conduce to unity of character. The really 
natural method is that of "concentric circles," a plan which the 
Herbartians object to as conducing to weariness. But do 
children really weary of their surroundings? No, they gradually 
learn more and more about them. Home, country, etc., come 
to be loved. Character rests on Will, Feeling, etc., not on 
Thought. The Herbartians seem to think that giving an ideal 
is the only thing necessary ; surely training is more important. 

Again, the Herbartians refuse to approve of moral instruction 
apart from religious. This is a mistake. It involves that 
morality is not the same for all, but varies according to sect. 
Moreover, men have come to regard the God of Sinai as a myth, 
and thus morals are in danger of being pulled down along with 
religion. 



SECTION XII. 

LINDE. 

(1899.) 

Reference. 
Linde. Der clarstellende Unterricht nach den Griindsatzen der Herbart- 
Zillersclien Schule und vom Standjpunkte des Nicht-Herbartianers. Brand- 
stetter, Leipzig, 1899. 

This is an able and impartial discussion of the so-called method 
of " developing-presentative Instruction " which many of the 
Herbartians prefer to the method of description and narration. 
Instead of the teacher telling and describing, he leads on the 
pupils by suggestion, illustration, and question to construct for 
themselves the whole scene or object under discussion. This 
plan is supposed to encourage mental activity, fluency of speech, 
and other desiderabilia. 

Linde gives an account of the views of Herbart, Ziller, and 
others upon this question, and then expresses his own opinion. 



174 The Critics of Herbartianism 

With Herbart there were, primarily, two kinds of instruction. 
One kind was occupied solely with widening the pupil's know- 
ledge and experience ; the other with the working over of ex- 
istent stores of knowledge so as to arrive at general relations. 
The first was "merely presentative," the second "analytic". 
There was a third kind, in which not only was new knowledge 
conferred, but this was also worked over systematically. It gave 
certain elements and then elucidated the relations between 
them. Such instruction was " synthetic ". 

" Merely presentative " instruction was of the nature of " tell- 
ing " or " describing ". It might take the form of an informal 
talk, for the living voice is better than a book. Clearly the pupil 
must, in such a case, have already had much experience of 
reality, or he cannot understand the teacher's references ; more- 
over, the pupil's vocabulary must correspond to his experiences. 
If his vocabulary be narrow, how can he properly appreciate the 
teacher's instruction ? 

Ziller uses the terms " analysis " and " synthesis " in a some- 
what different way from his master. He does not admit that 
there is any independent " analytical " method. Analysis is 
but a preparation for synthesis ; it is the first of the " formal 
steps ". The pupil is led to search among his already-acquired 
ideas (analysis), as these are necessary elements in the appercep- 
tion of new ones (synthesis). In Ziller's " analysis " there is 
no aiming at universal principles or relations. It merely reveals 
to the educator the already acquired knowledge of the scholar. 
Similarly, Ziller's "synthesis" involves no aiming at universal 
principles, but only the giving of concrete material. 1 

Both Herbart and Ziller lay stress on Association and System 
for the elaboration of new ideas. But Ziller lays far more stress 
than Herbart on the relation borne by the already possessed 
knowledge to the new material. This distinction is important. 

Ziller, aiming at making the far-off and remote vividly known, 
sees the importance of using the knowledge already possessed. 



1 These distinctions deserve to be kept in mind by the student of Herbart 
and Ziller, otherwise much confusion is likely to arise. 



Linde 175 

Thus the ideas of Sago and the Eeed Palm can be obtained by 
help of hothouse varieties as a basis. Herbart would also lead 
to the unknown by means of the known, but he laid greater stress 
than Ziller on the value of a fluent, inspiring narrative or descrip- 
tion by the teacher. The blending of old with new takes place 
quietly and spontaneously ; but to Ziller the process is conscious, 
logical, methodical. The process of appropriating the new tak* ;S 
place under the eyes of the teacher, who has gone down into the 
soul of the pupil, brought latent ideas to light, and thus illuminated 
what is new and strange. This is Ziller's u presentative In- 
struction ;" it makes a special art of the union of analysis with 
synthesis. 

While Herbart thought highly of narrative and description — 
the method of monologue— Ziller thought more of dialogue or 
conversation. New facts are not to be told to the child, but are 
to be led up to from those he already knows. Instead of saying, 
" Joseph and Mary went south," the teacher says, " Joseph and 
Mary went in the same direction as if we went to Bavaria " ; 
thereupon the children will say, " To the south ". Instead of 
describing in his own words the inundations of the Nile, he 
leads up to them, and then, examining the map, asks, " Will all 
Egypt be inundated ? " Discovering that high land bounds the 
Nile valley, the children will decide that this land will remain 
uncovered. " Where are the people likely to build their 
houses ? " On this high land. And thus the class develops 
the subject, and finally narrates the facts arrived at. 

The " developing " method is said to arouse the self-activity 
of the pupil to a high degree. Children construct history. Their 
wills and characters are supposed to be influenced by the method 
far more than by the narrative and descriptive method of Her- 
bart. The teacher should never do what the scholar himself can 
perform. The pupil must deliberate, and state his own ques- 
tions. Ziller claimed that this method of " disputation " rouses 
keen interest and joy, and also conduces greatly to fluency of 
speech on the part of the pupils. The method is also said to 
bring difficulties easily to light and to promote co-operation. 

filler and his friends (e.g., Eein) attack the descriptive and 



176 The Critics of Herbartianism 

narrative method as being defective in the respects just indi- 
cated. This last method is supposed to check the activity of 
the pupils, and the teacher can never be certain that the pupils 
fully grasp or apperceive what he tells them. The child may 
join false ideas to what the teacher says. 

But in point of fact, though the " developing " method some- 
times has its advantages, the "narrative " method has its advan- 
tages also, and these often balance the others. 

The aim of both methods is to represent vividly to the pupil's 
mind something not actually present, e.g., a palm, a storm at sea, 
an historical event. 

Now often the narrative or descriptive method is good for this 
purpose. Men like Foltz and Dorpfeld lay stress on the inspir- 
ing power of warm and eloquent delivery, and the latter writer 
has urged that there are moments so solemn that any break in the 
teacher's story would disturb the whole process of apperception. 
The pupil must simply listen in silent sympathy. A quiet state 
like this is often highly productive ; our best thoughts then 
come, and the ego is systematised and organised. Speech at 
such a moment would actually check the creative current. The 
method of disputation might conduce to a kind of outward ac- 
tivity, but the depths of the nature might be unaffected. There 
are always times when the narrative method is the better one ; 
and there are reserved natures which cannot express themselves 
outwardly. A child listening to a narrative is active in a sense, 
while the "much speaking" encouraged by the "developing'' 
method is no clear proof of deep thought. 

The " developing " method has dangers of its own. It shows 
a tendency to bring about false conjectures or guessing, especi- 
ally in the case of young children, who, not yet possessing full 
power to combine thought, often miss the crucial point of the 
lesson. 

The method often causes many ideas to be summoned up 

vhere only one is necessary. In order to lead on to some result 

e.g., the image of a foreign product) a whole series of objects 

re called to mind. The teacher's illustrations may not really 

ppeal to the child as nearly as he supposes. It may have been 



Li?ide 177 

far better for the teacher to narrate and describe and let the child 
interpret the narrative or description spontaneously, using his 
own mental resources. In fact, the teacher cannot control the 
apperception of the pupil so much as he may think. 

If the teacher describes or narrates with vividness, the child 
will readily apperceive the new, investing it with familiarity ac- 
cording to his own knowledge. This may be a better plan than 
a piecemeal method of disputation and dialogue. 

Another difficulty of the " developing " method is that the 
thoughts uttered by one child may not resemble those of the 
other children. 

Again, the method makes very great demands on the skill of 
the teacher. 

It is often best for the teacher just to let the new matter have 
its own silent course. 

Does the "developing" method really conduce to fluent 
speech ? Schmidt, Dorpfeld, and others have denied this. A 
vivid narrative sets forth right forms of speech as samples ; these 
sink into the child's mind, and are really more effective than the 
repartee encouraged by the "developing" method. 

Hence one arrives at the conclusion that though the " develop- 
ing " method is often useful, its excellencies are shared by the 
other method, and this latter has certain advantages of its own. 
Hence an alternation of the two may be advisable. 

A Few Further Points. — There is some difference of opinion 
among Zillerians as to whether the last three "formal steps " 
should be regarded as belonging to presentative instruction, or 
whether this instruction does not end with concrete " synthesis " 
(the second step). This last was Ziller's view ; the processes of 
abstraction are no part of presentative instruction. 

In addition to the dialogue method, Ziller recommended the 
extensive use of reading. Bible history had to be taught by these 
means. 

In very many cases, instead of using the "developing" or 
the narrative methods, the best plan is to present the object 
itself, or a picture of it, to the pupils. 



12 



178 The Critics of Herbartianisnl 

SECTION XIII. 

NATORP. 

(1899.) 

Chief References. 

(1) Natorp, Herbart, Pestalozzi und die heutigen Aufgaben der Erzie- 
hungslehre, 1899. Fromman, Stuttgart. 

(2) Fliigel, Just and Rein, " Herbart, Pestalozzi und Herr Professor 
Paul Natorp". Zeitschrift filr Philosophic und Padagogik. 4th vol. 
1899. 

(3) Willmann, "Der Neukantianismus gegen Herbarts Padagogik". 
Zeitschrift fiir Phil, und Pad. 2nd vol. 1899. 

(4) Willmann, " Uber Socialpadagogik ". Jahrbuch des Vereins fiir 
wissenschaftliche Padagogik. 1899. 

(5) Natorp, "Kant oder Herbart? Eine Gegenkritik." Die Deutsche 
Schule. July and August, 1899. 

One of the most recent, and in many respects the most interest- 
ing, of the many attacks upon Herbartianism has come from the 
philosophical chair of Marburg. Professor Paul Natorp is no 
neophytic opponent of presentational philosophy. An avowed 
follower of the " transcendental' ' movement inaugurated by 
Kant ; an author of works upon the theory of knowledge ; 1 
editor of the neo-Kantian Philosophische Monatshefte, and a 
frequent contributor to its pages, 2 Professor Natorp has long 
been in occupation of a philosophical standpoint removed toto 
coelo from that of Herbartianism. A criticism from such a 
source is bound to be far-reaching, bound to assail psychological 
principles even though leaving details and consequences un- 
challenged. Such indeed is the nature of the present attack. 
It assails the supposed foundations of Herbartianism, and only 
touches incidentally upon the deductions and applications of 
the system. 

1 Descartes Erkenntnisstheorie, 1882 ; Forschungen zur Geschichte des 
Erkenntnissproblems im Alter thum, 1884. 

2 "Einleitung in die Psychologie nach Kritischer Methode," 1888; 
" Analekten zur Geschichte der Philosophic," 1882. 



Natorp 179 



The controversy initiated (or rather resuscitated) by Professor 
Natorp is but one phase of the controversy which perennially 
divides philosophers into sharply opposed classes — the con- 
troversy between Spiritualism and Materialism, Idealism and 
Empiricism, Spontaneity and Mechanism. Though Herbart was 
no materialist, his principles have a greater affinity with a 
thoroughly mechanical (if not materialistic) view of the universe 
than with the opposite views. Presentationalist he was, in an 
emphatic sense, and Presentationalism is an ally (though a 
treacherous one) of Materialism. On the question of the Free- 
dom of the Will, Herbart's attitude was likewise quite' unam- 
biguous ; he was avowedly a determinist. 1 No wonder therefore 
that Natorp, a Kantian or neo-Kantian, devoted to the ter- 
minology if not to the cause of Libertarianism, could see little 
to approve of in the principles of Herbart. 

Upon the central problem thus indicated, there appears no 
likelihood of a philosophical consensus. Every man, we are 
told, is born either a Platonist or an Aristotelian, either a 
Libertarian or a Determinist, we may even say, either a Nator- 
pian or an Herbartian, according as his interests and impulses 
are directed to the active and moral or to the speculative and 
natural worlds. Not, of course, that Herbart was indifferent to 
moral problems. His educational system is pervaded through 
and through by a sense of their supreme importance, a sense so 
extreme that Natorp has to protest against the supposed neglect 
of the logical and aesthetic factors. But whereas Natorp's 
emphasis is constantly laid upon the inner principle of self, 
Herbart works from without inwards, and thus reveals his 
metaphysical affinity with Locke and Empiricism. Whichever 
side the reader may take in this interminable controversy of 
philosophy, he will not fail to admire the rigorous consistency 
with which Herbart, starting from the presentational standpoint, 
works 2 upwards to an elaborate system and downwards to a 
multitude of practical applications. 

1 His emphasis on the idea of " Inner Freedom " does not conflict with 
this statement. 

2 Of course Herbart recognises a "Soul". But virtually the presenta- 
tion, not the soul, is his unit. 



180 The Critics of Herbartianism 



No small fluttering occurred in the Herbartian dove-cote when 
Professor Natorp's attack saw the light. Previous attacks there 
had been, e.g., those of Vogel, Dittes, Ostermann, to say nothing 
of the more academic criticisms 1 to which all systems of philo- 
sophy are exposed. But Natorp's attack touched Herbartians 
at tender places. Their master was a "dogmatist"; he was 
unable to " develop " a thought ; he could neither understand 
nor appreciate Pestalozzi, though he tried to patronise his 
memory ; his philosophical followers were few and (what was 
worse) were antiquated " veterans " ; in short, Herbart was 
overrated and his followers were old-fashioned. 

It was no wonder, therefore, that the Herbartians responded 
with vigour to the attack opened upon them. No better intro- 
duction can be found to present-day educational problems of 
the philosophic type than a perusal of the two sides of this 
controversy. 

The most systematic reply to Natorp is contained in the 
fourth volume of the Z eitschrift fur Philosophic und Pddagogik, 
1899. As if to disprove the charge of numerical inferiority 
(a charge certainly based on very slight grounds) the reply 
came from several hands. 

Pastor Flugel, certainly a " veteran " in the defence of Her- 
bartianism (he had defended it against the previous strictures 
of Dittes and Ostermann), replied to the more specially psycho- 
logical side of Natorp's attack. Dr. Just, well known as an 
active writer on the Herbartian side and as director of an 
important school, defended Herbart's Ethic. The discussion 
of the pedagogical aspects of the question fell to the task of 
Professor Eein. But in a system such as Herbartianism, in 
which the Psychology, Ethics and Pedagogy are connected 
with some degree of closeness, the three defenders necessarily 
intruded on each other's domain, especially in their discussion 
of the Will. 

In the discussions which follow, the portions indicated by the 
letter (A) are expository of Natorp's criticism, those by (B) give 

1 E.g., those of Lotze and Trendelenburg. 



Natorp 181 

the Herbartian reply, while those indicated by (C) are remarks 
of the present writer. 

(1) The (supposed) parlous state of Herbartianism. 

(A) Professor Natorp declares himself not blind to the value 
of the Herbartian system. He attributes to it much stimulating 
power, many detailed excellences (more especially in the realm 
of practice), and considerable utility for the teacher who is 
beginning his work. It is the system as a whole which he con- 
demns, and it is its theoretical and philosophical aspects which 
alone he feels competent to discuss. [Natorp, p. 1.] * 

He is astonished at the enormous and apparently increasing 
influence of Herbart, an influence perhaps equal to that of all 
other educational writers put together. 2 Each age has its 
problems, and a dogmatist like Herbart is not the best guide in 
face of the onward movement of mankind. [2.] 

The strange thing is that Herbart's influence on education 
remains paramount although the philosophical foundations of his 
system have been almost abandoned. Scarcely a single active 
professional philosopher is an Herbartian, though a few veterans 
still exist. Even enthusiasts, while confident of the strength of 
the structure raised, admit that its foundations are in need of 
change. In view of the fact that almost all German philoso- 
phers have touched upon education, why this peculiar confidence 
in Herbart? [4.] 

Firstly because of the earnest interest he felt in education, and 
the prominent place it occupies in his system. Kant treated 
pedagogy as a secondary matter ; with him, moreover, the 
necessary psychology is almost non-existent, and his ethic shows 
a lack of immediate practical applicability. Fichte's principles 

1 The pages of the works consulted are given for the convenience of 
those who wish to refer to the originals. 

2 He considers that instead of going to Herbart we should go (1) for the 
end or goal of education, to Kant ; (2) for ways and methods, to Pestalozzi 
at his best ; (3) for questions of organisation, to Pestalozzi, Fichte and 
Schleierrnacher, 



1 82 The Critics of Herbartianism 

are far removed from the workaday world of education. 
Schleiermacher, however, approaches Herbart more closely, and 
it is astounding that his influence is so small. He is as much 
a psychologist and a moralist as Herbart, and there is much of 
immediate practical value in his work ; yet he has founded no 
school, and there are few tolerable works which deal with his 
pedagogical labours, while Herbartian literature counts' its hun- 
dreds of volumes. Doubtless Schleiermacher's manner is at the 
root of the difference. [5.] 

A second reason for Herbart's influence is the impressiveness 
of his manner. He employs the short, measured speech of 
authority. There is no wearisome weighing of for and against, 
no doubt or hesitation, such as we find in Schleiermacher. 
Herbart's ripe results shine forth like fruit on a tree, and only 
need to be shaken in order to fall into the basket. The talent 
of authority which, as a practical teacher, he possessed in an 
unusual degree, has passed into his theoretical delivery. Hence 
men feel that he lived in the very element of pedagogic practice, 
and as he was, in addition, Philosopher, Moralist and Psycholo- 
gist, he has aroused unusual confidence. [6.] 

Then, again, his educational doctrines have proved really 
fruitful in practice, and this, with many, is a clear sign of their 
truth. [7.] 

To appeal to the practical value of Herbart's doctrine is, how- 
ever, tacitly to surrender the claim that they are philosophically 
established. Away with his theories ! But Herbart himself 
would scarcely agree to having the useful maxims of his pedagogy 
picked out while his system as a whole is renounced. And there 
Natorp agrees with Herbart : a theoretical foundation is neither 
superfluous nor of secondary importance. [7.] 

Are, then, the foundations of Herbart's system really secure ? 
If they are not, no excellence of another kind can compensate 
for the deficiency; neither his genuine enthusiasm for education, 
his love for human beings, nor his distinct sense for the useful 
and applicable. Self-confidence is doubtless necessary for the 
practical man ; but for the theorist, self-criticism. It is here that 
Herbart is deficient. We distrust his dogmatic, " It is so ". [8.] 



Natorp 183 



Criticisms of Herbartianism have not been wanting. Attacks 
upon special points, especially upon Ziller's development of 
the system, have been numerous, and Herbartians themselves 
have surrendered or greatly modified some of the chief parts 
of their master's pedagogy. Dittes and Ostermann (the latter 
from approximately the standpoint of Lotze) have been 
among the chief opponents ; Ostermann' s direct attack upon 
Herbart's psychology comes close to the present criticism. In 
fact, modern psychology is leaving Herbartianism quite behind. 
But the decision of the question, " For or against Herbart ? " is 
really not so much a psychological question as one concerning 
Logic, Ethics and Esthetics, for it is these studies which have 
to decide what the aim of education is to be. Even from the 
point of view of the means, Psychology is not so important as 
adherents and opponents of Herbart alike suppose. The other 
three studies are the real foundations of Pedagogy, Knowledge, 
Morality and iEsthetic culture being the ends with which they 
are concerned ; while Psychology may be regarded either as 
identical with these (or contained in them), or as a special 
study which informs as to the application of the general prin- 
ciples of education (ascertained from the other three studies) to 
each special case in its peculiarity. Thus, while the human 
content of consciousness — with its three aspects, scientific, 
moral, aesthetic — builds itself up out of its elements in accor- 
dance with unchanging laws — this growth may be hindered in 
special cases, and here comes in the value of Psychology and 
Physiology. Thus, after all, the value of Psychology for educa- 
tion is but slight, and in any case is quite secondary ; hence 
even if Herbart's psychological presentation-mechanism were a 
valid notion (which it is not), it would be no basis for education. 
That basis cannot be found in Psychology at all. [11.] 

(B) The defenders of Herbartianism have done their best to 
answer the above criticisms. 

Instead of Herbartianism as a philosophical and psychological 
system being little more than "historical," and its advocacy 
being confined to " veterans," psychologies of the Herbartian 



184 The Critics of Herba?'tianism 

school " rule the present market ". Natorp's emphasis on physi- 
ology has no point for Herbartians, for they welcome all physio- 
logical and psycho-physical investigations. (Flugel, pp. 257-9.) 
The complaint that Herbart's psychology ignores the difficulties 
of individual cases is refuted by the existence of Herbart's letters 
on the application of Psychology to Pedagogy, in which he dis- 
cusses the difficulties arising from physiological hindrances ; 
and also by the zeal of Herbartians like Strumpell, Ufer, 
Triiper, and Koch in these very directions. Natorp claims 
that Herbartian psychology is useless in such cases ; in reality 
he himself exaggerates the psychological value of physiology. 
Contrast his view with that of the psycho-physicist Munster- 
berg, who explicitly denied that his favourite study can throw 
real light on mental problems. [259-60.] 

Herbart was not a " dogmatist ". He emphasised the neces- 
sity for scepticism at the beginning of philosophical thinking as 
the only salvation from " stupid and arrogant dogmatism," and 
warned teachers against impressing their own modes of thinking 
on their scholars. Instead of Herbart being incapable of doubt, 
he once exclaimed : " Are we never to be able to grasp the whole 
completely?" [Eein, pp. 298-300.] 

(C) The charge of " dogmatism " is of little real gravity ; the 
exposition of any systematic scheme must appear dogmatic 
unless the expounder choose to qualify and apologise in every 
paragraph. But if Herbart's system were a rigidly fixed 
one how can we explain the varied development it has experi- 
enced from his followers? Moreover, no men have done more 
for the study of abnormal mental phenomena manifested in 
children than the Herbartians. 

Still, the defenders of Herbart serve their cause ill when they 
try to defend his Psychology en bloc. Natorp is right in re- 
garding it as scientifically antiquated. The whole tendency of 
modern psychological thought is away from a system which, 
though not exactly ignoring biological facts, has no logical place 
for them, and which was elaborated in pre-Darwinian times. 
Herbartian psychologists have been compelled to concede that 



Natorp 185 



ideas are not absolute causes, but rather occasions of volition. 
Still, the value of the work of Strumpell, Volkmann, Waitz, 
Cornelius, Nahlowsky, and other Herbartians is admitted. 
Moreover, a presentational Psychology may be, after all, the 
best for a pedagogue, seeing that presentations are the material 
with which he works. 

(2) The "disconnectedness" of Herbart' s teaching. 

(A) Herbart was devoid of the power of developing his prin- 
ciples logically and consecutively. Clear in details — indeed a 
model of clearness — he seems to have had no feeling that these 
must hang together in indissoluble connection. Will it never be 
the lot of a true thinker to influence the teachers of the rising 
generation? [Natorp, p. 8.] 

(B) What a contrast between the above opinion of Natorp 
and that expressed in the Herbart Recollections, which describe 
Herbart's maxims as " bound together as closely as the mem- 
bers of a mathematical demonstration ! " [Eein, p. 300.] 

(C) The above objection of Natorp is probably the most 
unfounded of any in his book. There is no system of philosophy 
in existence of a more unitary character than Herbart's. The 
unit is the presentation, and everything hangs upon this. There 
is no " Will-faculty," etc., to introduce disturbing factors ; Her- 
bart, indeed, was a vigorous opponent of every " faculty" 
doctrine. His system may be right or wrong, but that it is 
thoroughgoing and systematic in the highest degree few will 
deny. 

(3) Attitude and relation of Herbart to Pestalozzi. 

(A) Pestalozzi is the only educationist at present held in a 
reverence at all commensurable with that given to Herbart. 
But he is not reckoned as a philosopher. People tell us that 
Herbart has methodically embodied in his own system the best 
of Pestalozzi — the principles which the great Swiss teacher had 
arrived at in a half-dreaming manner. Eeally this is not so. 



1 86 The Critics of Herbartianism 



There is a great contrast between the two, and Herbart never 
did justice — could not do justice — to his predecessor ; though 
he praises and patronises him often enough, he alters his 
thoughts and subordinates thein to his own. [Natorp, p. 5.] 

Whereas Herbart, as seen above, subordinated everything to 
the moral aim, Pestalozzi insisted on the necessary unity of the 
culture of " Head, Heart and Hand," of Intellect, Will and 
Artistic ability. [12.] 

He insisted, too, upon the necessity of an investigation of the 
elements of mental life and then upon a steady advance to the 
complex content of consciousness. [12.] 

In these two points Pestalozzi is in full agreement with 
Kant, as also in others, such as his emphasis on the funda- 
mental concept of Anschauung and his ethical views. He had 
scarcely read Kant, but perhaps he had learnt some of his 
fundamental thoughts from conversation with Fichte. From 
the point of view of sociology and social pedagogy he even went 
beyond Kant. Pestalozzi was no dreamer ; he had investigated 
the fundamental springs and form of human nature, and it was 
for this reason that, though he fell into errors of detail, he 
anticipated so accurately the further developments of mankind. 
[13.] 

Herbart, on the contrary, stands in pronounced contrast to 
Pestalozzi. He was excellent as a practitioner of education ; 
Pestalozzi was not. He was well versed in all kinds of science, 
and was a clear thinker in matters of detail. But he was in- 
capable of forming systematic and all-embracing views, even 
incapable of understanding them when offered by others (Kant, 
Fichte, Pestalozzi). [13-4.] 

The two men did not mean the same thing when they spoke 
of psychology, and it is not true that Herbart supplied the 
desiderated psychological foundation for his predecessor's views. 
Pestalozzi meant the fundamental laws by which the content 
of human culture grows from its elements, these elements being 
deduced from Ethics, Logic and ^Esthetics. Contrast this with 
Herbart's presentational-mechanism ! [14-5.] 



Natorp 187 

(B) Herbart constantly confesses his indebtedness to Pesta- 
lozzi, as can be seen by any unprejudiced reader of those 
writings of Herbart which deal with his predecessor's work. 
In addition to obligations of a minor character 1 no one had 
a finer understanding than Herbart of the Pestalozzian doctrine 
of Apperception-Instruction. He even remained true to his 
master when, long ago, men's enthusiasm for the latter had 
waned. Natorp with his illegitimate formula " Herbart or 
Pestalozzi" implies an opposition between them, but in point 
of fact Herbart worked on the lines of his predecessor, and the 
true formula is "Herbart and Pestalozzi". Natorp' s formula 
has been invented by the enemies of Herbartianism, who use 
Pestalozzi's name for controversial purposes. [Eein, pp. 296-7.] 

Natorp is thoroughly prejudiced against Herbart, while to- 
wards Pestalozzi his attitude is equally prejudiced but in the 
opposite direction. He completely passes over Pestalozzi's 
many obscurities and inconsistencies. But apart from this, 
he always sees Pestalozzi through the spectacles of his own 
theory of knowledge, just as Niederer had thrown the doctrine 
of the great Swiss into confusion by a dragging in of the 
philosophy of Fichte. It is a service of Wiget to have revealed 
the additions of Niederer. Natorp appears ignorant of Wiget's 
work. Apparently Natorp's prejudice against Herbart is due 
to the impossibility of fitting the clear unambiguous thoughts 
of the latter into the structure of a ready-made theory of know- 
ledge, while Pestalozzi's ambiguities are much more adaptable 
for such a purpose. [300-1.] 

The Pestalozzian doctrine of Anschauung has really but 
little affinity with that of Kant. Pestalozzi understood by 
x\nschauung the impression of an outer object upon our senses, 
not, as Natorp thinks, the generation of the mathematical form of 
anschaubar things out of the pure elements of our Anschauung 
itself (an addition of Niederer). Pestalozzi would have rejected 
Natorp's interpretation as readily as he did Niederer's. [301-2.] 

Along with this must go Natorp's undervaluing of Psychology 

1 Such as the use of transparent plates of horn. 



1 88 The Critics of Herbartianism 

and his exaltation of criticism of knowledge into the first place, 
by which choice he condemns himself to unfruitfulness. More- 
over, Pestalozzi would never have founded his system upon the 
notion of a pure spontaneity. [302.] 

(A) Natorp in his reply (Die Deutsche Schule, August, 1899) 
justifies his greater severity towards Herbart on the ground that 
the latter' s professions are greater than those of Pestalozzi, and 
are therefore to be judged accordingly. He also stoutly main- 
tains the existence of Kantianism in Pestalozzi previous to the 
influence of Niederer. There is no real contradiction in appeal- 
ing to experience and at the same time to deduction (vide 
Kant, Pestalozzi, etc.). 

(C) The present writer's reading leads him here to side again 
with the Herbartians. There is nothing " condescending " about 
Herbart's treatment of his great predecessor. The principle of 
Anschauung was "the grand idea of its discoverer, the noble 
Pestalozzi ". Herbart seized hold of it gratefully, and, in the 
opinion of the vast majority of educationists, developed it 
successfully into the Apperception doctrine by showing the 
essential contribution of the mental factor. 

(4) The aim or goal of Education. 

(A) In considering the aim or goal of education we find that 
Herbart lays great stress upon Ethics. Morality is the goal of 
education. But this is a one-sided view. Logic and ^Esthetics 
have a right to insist upon their aims, Knowledge and ^Esthetic 
culture. [Natorp, p. 11.] 

In point of fact education must rest on Philosophy as a whole, 
not upon two fragments of it, Psychology and Ethics. Will, 
Intellect, ^Esthetic imagination — all three must be considered, 
along with, of course, their respective psychologies. [11-2.] 

(B) Natorp would be right if the three goals (Ethical, Intel- 
lectual and iEsthetic) were of equal worth. But they are not 
so. There is only one absolute goal, as Kant himself points 



Natorp 189 

out ; a good and moral Will is always good, while ^Esthetic or 
Intellectual power may be devoted to evil purposes. Hence 
Ethics alone gives the goal of Education. Logic and ^Esthetics 
have a subordinate use only. 

Even Natorp himself in another place [p. 72] admits (here 
contradicting himself) that the Ethical end is the highest educa- 
tional goal, not merely as the most elevated but also as including 
and controlling the others. The difference between the two 
men is that while with Natorp the place of the highest educa- 
tional aim (Morality) remains a mere phrase, for Logical and 
^Esthetic culture go their own ways — with Herbart the latter 
appear as preliminary steps or means to the moral goal. Here, 
too, Pestalozzi is in full agreement with Herbart. He declares 
that only by a subordination of all the other claims of our nature 
to the higher claims of Morality is a harmony of our powers 
possible. [Just, pp. 277-8.] 

(C) The question above mooted is no easy one to answer, and 
its solution has as much philosophical interest as pedagogical. 

Moralists (e.g., Sidgwick, Methods of Ethics, 6th edition, pp. 
399-402) have frequently found a difficulty in considering the 
possible conflict of the Moral with the Logical goal. Suppose 
that on a complete view of the universe we became convinced 
that it was essentially cruel or purposeless, would it be our duty 
to proclaim the truth ? Would not the claims of the moral life 
be endangered by such a proclamation ? If so, have we to risk 
the subversion of morality ? Or have we to regard Morality as 
the highest end and endeavour to subordinate everything, even 
Truth, to that ? Such ultimate questions cannot be solved to 
the satisfaction of every one ; some controversialists will insist 
that Truthfulness is an absolute duty, others will subordinate 
it to Morality, while others again will be so bold as to deny the 
possibility of a conflict. Similar questions arise with respect 
to the relations of Art and Morality. 

The question is, therefore, not merely one between Herbart 
and Natorp, but one of perennial interest. 

With regard to the pedagogical aspect of the question, it may 



190 The Critics of Herbartianistn 

be pointed out that English teachers, who for the most part 
have not yet been appreciably touched by the Herbartian spirit, 
do not feel the importance of the issue thus raised. Their ideals 
are those of imparting knowledge and dexterity — mainly the 
Logical and iEsthetic ideals. So far as the Moral ideal affects 
them at all, its operations are confined to a few definite " re- 
ligious " lessons ; it does not permeate their whole work. The 
two aims remain separated by conventional barriers ; hence, 
when a teacher is asked to instil " temperance " or " humani- 
tarianism " he frequently regards these subjects as " outside 
his province ". But such a confession is virtually an exaltation 
of the Logical and iEsthetic ideals at the expense of the Moral. 
The case just cited probably represents the usual attitude of the 
English teacher. The two ideals are conventionally held apart 
in the " Time Table," but when there is any possibility of mutual 
interference the " Moral " has to give way. 

The agitations for "religious" education are in large measure 
an outcome of this hard and fast separation which is made 
between " sacred " and " secular " subjects, a separation which 
is itself due to a non-recognition of the moral value of "secular " * 
subjects and an ignorance of the psychology of human motive. 

The great service of Herbartianism has been to break down 
the barrier above indicated. " Secular " instruction loses its 
stigma if it can be shown to enter into the field of motive and 
action. This it does when Apperceptive Interest has been 
aroused. Geography, Mathematics, Science become moral forces, 
for as sources of "Interest" they draw or impel the pupil in 
the direction of an elevated life. Even on a lower view they 
may be regarded as moral forces so far as they may have the 
effect of keeping the pupil throughout his life from the debasing 
pursuits which the ignorant man almost inevitably follows. 

1<< Abgesehen vom Religions-unterricht, von dem man vermoge seines 
Inhalts einen einfluss auf Gemiit und Willen des Zoglings erwartet, ver- 
folgen die Unterrichts-gegenstande einen selbstandigen Zweck, namlich 
die Aneignung eines bestimmten Wissens und Konnens, damit der Zogling 
dereinst im Leben sich gut forthelfen konne. . . . Eine solche Aufiassung 
ist . . . unhaltbar." Rein, Pddagogik im Grundriss, pp. 78-9. 



Natorp 191 

" The stupid man cannot be virtuous," for he has no springs of 
action except such as lead to vice. The man with a vital 
interest in Art, or Science, or History has an enormously 
greater chance of being "virtuous" (using this word even in 
the usual narrow sense) than the man devoid of such interest. 
Positively these interests are springs of worthy volition ; nega- 
tively they keep from vice. 

In short, " Interest " is the bridge from the Intellectual to 
the Moral realm — a bridge which popular theology, with its 
hard and fast separation of the " sacred " from the " secular," 
is daily rejecting. It is the imperishable work of Herbart to 
have discovered (the word is not too strong) this bridge, and to 
have arrayed ^Esthetic and Scientific culture under the banner 
of Virtue. If many-sided Interest be so important, so vital, as 
Herbartians allege, then the demonstration of the unitary nature 
of Herbart' s goal is his crowning achievement. The teacher of 
Mathematics is the teacher of Virtue, and there is no longer any 
need to regard Education as having three or more conflicting 
ends in view. 



(5) Herbart' s mistaken separation of " Training" from 
" Discipline ". 

(A) Reserving for future consideration the very important 
question of the relation of Instruction (culture of the Under- 
standing) to Education as a whole (culture of the Will), we 
have now to consider the validity of Herbart" s distinction be- 
tween the other two agencies, Training (Zucht) and Discipline 
(Eegierung). [Natorp, pp. 48-9.] 

Herbart lays stress upon the fact that Instruction (the culture 
of the Understanding or the formation of the "circle of 
thought ") is the chief agency for the culture of the Will also. 
"There ought to be no Instruction which does not educate." 
By Training he means whatever, apart from Instruction 
proper, cultivates the Will. But what then remains for 
Discipline? Something comparatively unimportant; indeed 
something, according to Herbart himself, hardly belonging to 



192 The Critics of Herbartianism 

Education but yet not entirely separable from it. The purpose 
of Discipline lies in the present, not in the future ; it aims 
merely at outward order, which is a prerequisite of education, 
but not in itself educative. No doubt Discipline immediately 
influences the pupil's state of mind, but it serves no ulterior 
purpose. Punishment (under Discipline) ignores the intention 
of the agent, and considers only the act itself ; while genuinely 
educative punishment considers intention also. [49-50.] 

Natorp holds that his separation of Training from Discipline 
is utterly untenable, and points out that even Herbartians have 
remodelled it. [50.] 

Discipline is supposed to regulate merely the outer behaviour 
of the pupil. But surely outer behaviour is subject to the laws 
of morality ! The question is, whether, in connection with 
education, the merely " right " relation apart from the moral 
can be of any value. Surely not. External order is necessary, 
but only for the sake of the internal moral order. The educator 
cannot separate himself into a moral and into a merely " right " 
being. A punishment which aims at subjection pure and simple 
and does not address itself to the will of the pupil is imper- 
missible. Even outer order must only be preserved through 
moral means, and the pupil, though himself ignorant of the 
right way, must willingly confide in the guidance of the tutor. 
[51.] 

Herbart seems to think that at such a stage the child is 
devoid of will ; but surely it has a will in process of becoming ; 
and this very fact makes the psychical influences upon it of great 
importance. The smallest influence has not only a momentary 
but a permanent result. [52.] 

Certainly we may admit that there are permanent and 
momentary, moral and merely right, positive and negative 
influences ; influences through the will of the pupil and through 
merely momentary excitations. But the latter must be abso- 
lutely subordinated to the former. Hence the separation of 
Training from Discipline is untenable, and we are left only 
with Training and Instruction. [53.] 



Natorp 193 

(B) Natorp declares that Herbart's doctrine of "Discipline" 
is in no single point tenable. But this is to shoot beyond the 
mark. Herbartians have already modified Herbart's doctrine, 
and instead of the three divisions, Training, Discipline and In- 
struction, now adopt two, Guidance (Fuhrung) and Instruction. 
But Herbart's differentiation of Training from Discipline has 
still some theoretical and practical significance. Natorp himself 
admits the distinction between negative and positive modes of 
action in connection with the training of children ; merely 
" right " as contrasted with genuinely " moral " ; momentary as 
contrasted with lasting ; modes which make use of momentary 
stimuli as contrasted with those which act through the Will. 
Here, then, is the distinction between " Discipline " and 
" Training " ; both, however, ought to be subsumed under the 
concept of "Guidance". [Eein, p. 303.] 

(C) Despite the partial recantation of Herbartians from the 
triple classification of their master, this classification can 
frequently be illustrated in the concrete from English methods 
of teaching. The functions of "Discipline" pure and simple 
seem in no danger of being absorbed in those of the other 
two, so far, at any rate, as Elementary Schools are con- 
cerned. 

In view of the large classes which are usual rather than 
exceptional in these schools, the necessity of firm Discipline is 
all-important. "Are you a good disciplinarian?" is the first 
question asked of a candidate for a pedagogic post, and the 
meaning of the question is, " Are you able to maintain a system 
of military precision ? " 

The question of punishments is the most important in this 
connection. The punishments of Discipline are based mainly 
on the Eetributive and Exemplary theories ; while those of 
Training (in the Herbartian sense) rest on the Reformatory 
theory. In this country of large classes, the Exemplary theory 
is the prevalent one in school life ; and the chief scholastic 
offences are not "moral offences" at all, but offences against 
a rigid code of military rules which have no existence or utility 

13 



194 The Critics of Herbariianism 

outside of school life, and which would have none in school but 
for the exigencies of the large-class system. 

It would be no exaggeration to say that in the English 
elementary school — 

''Discipline" is regarded as all-important. 

"Training" (in the Herbartian sense) is, except so far as it 
comes under " religious influence," almost non-existent. 

" Instruction " is plentiful, but its genuinely educative (i.e., 
will-forming) character is unrecognised owing to the artificial 
separation, based largely on theological prejudices, between 
"sacred" and "secular" subjects, and an almost complete 
ignoring of the Herbartian doctrine that action springs out 
of the circle of thought, and that, through the mediation of 
" Interest," " secular " instruction can become a moral force and 
pass into action. 

It may therefore be said that Herbart's much criticised three- 
fold classification has still some significance, though in practice 
there is sometimes no precise separation between the three 
agencies, and with the majority of teachers no clear recognition 
of their essential differences. 

(6) The Herbartian doctrine of " Educative Instruction" — -The 
distinction between Instruction (Unterricht) and Training 
(Zucht). 

(A) At first one would be inclined to understand these latter 
in the following sense : — 

Instruction — the culture of the Understanding. 

Training — the culture of the Will. 
But this cannot be Herbart's meaning, for he refuses to admit 
the distinction between the three soul faculties, Understanding, 
Feeling and Will. Moreover, he insists that there should be 
no Instruction which does not educate (i.e., form the Will), and 
the final aim of Education must be, in accordance with this, 
an ethical aim. With Herbart the Will has no territory of its 
own in the mental life, and is a pure result of the movement 
of the presentation-masses; thus the whole culture of the 



Natorp 195 



Will — or nearly the whole — depends on the culture of the 
Understanding, the formation of the circle of thought — in other 
words, on Instruction. 

What then remains for Training ? Only the supplementary 
and secondary influences which come through the stimulus 
of pleasure and pain so far as these influences are directed to 
Will-Culture, and are not merely on account of Discipline. 
[Natorp, pp. 54-5.] 

The close connection or virtual identity between the culture 
of the Will and that of the Understanding is the essence of 
Herbart's famous theory — that of Educative Instruction. No 
doubt, with Pestalozzi, in spite of his emphasis on the Instruction 
of " Head, Heart and Hand," the final goal of Education is the 
Morality of the Will, an aim in which, according to him, the 
other possible aims unite. Still the culture of the Intellect or 
of the ^Esthetic faculty has with him a relative independence. 
But this view is departed from by Herbart and still more by the 
Herbartians. They seem to ignore the claims of the intellectual 
and aesthetic and to exaggerate those of the moral nature of 
man. But surely a thing may be intellectually true or false, 
aesthetically correct or incorrect, quite apart from moral con- 
siderations. [55-6.] 

It is said that Knowledge and Ability (Konnen) are dead 
possessions provided they do not influence the culture of the 
moral Will. But we are not speaking of a " dead " Knowledge 
or Ability, but of living and creative processes. Doubtless, 
the kind of consciousness connected with them is also related 
closely to Will consciousness ; Morality indeed is the pro- 
minent point towards which these others point ; still there is a 
kind of independence in the three. It was Kant who established 
this threefold classification ; Schiller and Pestalozzi agreed 
with it ; while Herbart, and still more his adherents, are in 
danger of destroying it. [56.] 

We must not wonder if reactionaries welcome Herbart's 
doctrine as a reason for refusing satisfaction to the intellectual 
and aesthetic needs of the people. [56-7.] 

The real reproach, however, only attaches to Herbart himself 



196 The Critics of Herbartianism 

in a small degree. In fact it is difficult to reconcile clearly his 
exaggerated stress upon the Will when the aim of education 
is being considered with his extraordinary minimising of the 
significance of the Will in general. The culture of the Will 
depends not, of course, on the Will itself, but, in accordance 
with his Ethics, upon Taste. Hence one would expect him to 
put iEsthetic culture at the summit; yet he really almost ignores 
it. The Will, according to him, depends on the movement of 
presentations, hence the formation of the "circle of thought" 
is "everything to the educator". Only a small task is left to 
the feeling-influences of Training, the task of " making a path 
for instruction ". [57-8.] 

Thus we find that when Herbart considers the aim of 
education he lays an exaggerated emphasis on the culture of 
the moral Will, and ignores the claims of intellectual and 
aesthetic culture ; but when he considers the means, he lays an 
equally exaggerated emphasis on Instruction (Understanding- 
culture). [58.] 

(B) Natorp's criticism is based on a caricature of Herbart's 
doctrine. He has omitted Herbart's central thought, that of 
Interest. It is this concept which connects the Instruction goal 
(culture of the Understanding) with the goal of Education in 
general (culture of the Will). It is true, Natorp refers to 
" Interest " (p. 64), but strangely regards it as a side goal of 
Education, and he does not enter upon the psychological rela- 
tions of the factor of Interest to Presentation and Willing. 
Interest is the fundamental concept of the theory of Educative 
Instruction, and it possesses a permanent worth even if the 
practical details of Herbartianism were abandoned. Moreover, 
" Interest " supplies the very element of inner activity which 
Natorp finds missing in Herbart's system, and, moreover, brings 
Herbart into close connection with Pestalozzi. He declares 
that his chief effort was identical with that of his predecessor, 
namely, to find out the best order of succession, the best fitting- 
together of the teaching material, so that the attention of the 
children may be seized and enchained. It was with this aim in 



Natorp 197 

view that Pestalozzi tried to understand the normal process of 
man's development, individual and racial, and this work has 
been taken up by Herbartians (witness their doctrine of " culture 
steps "). [Eein, pp. 304-5.] 

(C) The judgment upon the above issue must probably be of 
a mixed character. 

Natorp has undoubtedly committed a most serious oversight 
— perhaps the worst of all in his work — in not recognising the 
central position of Herbart's " Interest" doctrine. 1 It is this 
doctrine which bridges over the gap between intellectual and 
moral Education. It is Interest which converts an intellectual 
apprehension of History or of Natural Science into a moral 
force, a force which not only negatively keeps the pupil " out of 
mischief," but positively moulds his future conduct and pursuits. 
Interest (provided we do not mean by it a merely momentary 
feeling of pleasure) is the greatest moral force in existence, we 
might almost say, the only moral force if we except the re- 
wards and punishments of " Training " and " Discipline ". It is 
safe to say that a pupil who has a keen interest in Literature 
or in some social or cosmic question (we must not ignore the 
"many-sidedness" of Herbart's concept of Interest) is certain, 

1 Natorp replies (Die Deutsche Schule, August, 1899, pp. 507-8) that he 
only is following Herbart's own exposition (Allgemeine Pcidagogik, Book I., 
chapter ii.), according" to which, though Morality is the chief goal of 
education, "many-sided Interest" is another goal not necessarily entirely 
identical with the other. Moreover, Herbartian " Interest " is not, as Rein 
thinks, a " forward-willing " directed to the future (and therefore constitut- 
ing the missing element desiderated by Natorp), but is, according toHer- 
bart, strictly dependent on the perceptions of the moment. It works from 
without, not from within, and hence is quite a different thing from what 
Natorp demands. 

Natorp has done good service in pointing out the elements of hesitation 
in Herbart (though it is difficult to see how these elements can be recon- 
ciled with a charge of "dogmatism"). But undoubtedly " Interest " and 
the close connection between " Interest " and character form the essence 
of Herbartian doctrine, and this essence stands firm even though Herbart 
may momentarily or provisionally have raised doubts. 



198 The Critics of Herbartianisnl 



other things being equal, to grow up more moral than indi- 
viduals devoid of such interests. 

Again, Natorp's reproach that Her bar t, in considering the 
ways and means of Education, lays undue stress upon Intel- 
lectual culture (just as, conversely, in considering the aim of 
Education, he lays undue stress upon Morality) is rebutted by 
the point just mentioned, viz., the very wide meaning attached 
by Her bart to the notion of "Interest". If "Interest" meant 
with Herbart "Empirical" and "Speculative Interest" only, 
Natorp's strictures might be well justined. But one of the most 
characteristic features of Herbart' s doctrine is that Interest 
must be many-sided. Empirical and Speculative Interest are 
only two varieties out of the six he enumerates, the others 
being ^Esthetic, Sympathetic, Social and Beligious. 

It may be admitted, however, on Natorp's side, that though 
Apperceptive Interest is always a morai agency, some varieties 
are morally educative in a greater degree than others. The 
connection between Mathematics and Morality is less close than 
that between Literature and Morality. Doubtless, as pointed 
out before, each of these studies has a moral influence of two 
kinds : (1) An interest in them keeps their possessor " out of 
the mischief " which results from emptiness of mind and 
absence of engrossing pursuits. (2) An interest in them leads 
on to a life of genuinely elevated character. But beyond this, 
virtue, in the narrower sense, is not appreciably 1 influenced 
by mathematical study owing to the abstract nature of the 
subject and the absence in it 01 the humanistic factor. 

There are, in point of fact, two concepts of Virtue. The 
Greek concept is a wide, one, and is inclusive of Wisdom and 
Culture. The Puritanical concept omits these latter elements. 
There can be no doubt but that Herbart accepted the wider 
ideal, and hence he could, with perfect appropriateness, connect 
Instruction with Virtue and Morality, and regard the latter as 

1 Perseverance, exactness and similar qualities are, no doubt, cultivated, 
but they are not " virtuous " in the narrower sense, though there is plenty 
of room for them within the larger ideal. 



Natorp 199 



springing directly out of the " circle of thought " which it is 
the work of Instruction to form. Even on an acceptance of 
the narrower ideal, the connection between Morality and In- 
struction is important, and Herbart has won an immortality of 
fame by working it out. Still, in this latter case the connection 
is less striking and direct, though surely real enough to merit 
the solemn attention of teachers and reformers. A vast amount 
of evil is directly traceable to emptiness of mind, and philanthro- 
pists may with good reason devote their efforts to creating healthy 
interests and impulses, rather than to removing the necessary 
after-results of this emptiness. 

(7) The Herbartian Theory of the Will, considered ethically. 
Kant and Herbart. 

(A) Herbart constantly waged war against certain Kantian 
doctrines, though, in Natorp' s opinion, these doctrines are the 
only secure basis for Ethics and Pedagogy. 

Kant's central thought was the Autonomy of the moral Will. 1 
The moral Will must not be determined by anything external to 
itself ; any command, impulse, or desire. It must be determined 
by itself alone, and be not only an executive but a law-giving 
Will. Its only principle is that of harmony or consistency with 
itself, and this principle is clearly a formal one. [Similarly with 
Understanding ; that which is objectively true is consistent ; in 
both cases, conflict or contradiction is the test of untruth.] The 
strongest appeal that can ever be made to the human Will re- 
sults from this fact of self-judgment. Surely Education should 
recognise this fact and demand the highest thing possible from 
man. Was it not a retrogression when Herbart surrendered 
this point of view ? [19-22.] 

His reasons for doing so were psychological. How can such 
a faculty of absolute self-determination be thought of? Will 
must depend on presentations ; there is no Will per se ; hence 

1 Kant's famous " categorical imperative " was, " Act only on such a 
maxim as you can at the same time will to be a universal law ". In other 
words, " Never make exceptions for yourself ". 



2oo The Critics of Herbartianism 

the Will cannot sit in judgment on the Will. But surely (re- 
plies Natorp) though no single act of Will can give the law to 
another act, yet there is the formal law of the Will ; the har- 
mony of the Will with itself. Herbart ignores this. Harmony 
of willing is the ultimate test of morality, just as harmony of be- 
lief is the ultimate testfof truth. [22-5.] 

(B) The above question is the fundamental one in the present 
discussion. Natorp is a libertarian ; the Will is, with him, a 
causeless spontaneity. It is the one vital element in man and 
the universe ; it is the norm of the moral life. [Fliigel, p. 261.] 

Kant's great service was to reject the pleasure-theory of 
morals, and to lay emphasis on the form of willing. Did 
Herbart really depart from Kant's position ? No. He still 
opposed the pleasure theory, and held that moral worth can 
only be found in the form of willing. [Just, pp. 279-80.] Her- 
bart and Natorp both feel that it is necessary to find somewhere 
a judgment upon the Will, in order to know whence comes its 
worth and dignity. Natorp finds that the Will is good so far as 
it is autonomous — devoid of all motive except itself. Thus, the 
good Will is the one which suppresses every momentary desire 
or makes it conform to itself. But surely this is possible with 
great sinners as well as great saints ! An avaricious or ambitious 
man may will with perfect consistency. [Fliigel, p. 263.] 

No doubt ''harmony of the Will with itself" is aesthetically 
pleasing. Napoleon's will was in harmony with itself, but, being 
egoistic, was immoral. If the good Samaritan had made a 
general rule of hating the Jews, would he have been immoral 
in relieving the distressed man? Mere harmony of Will does 
not prove morality of Will ; there mus-t be a general type of 
worthy willing. [Just, p. 282.] 

Herbart, quite as strongly as Kant, insisted that the moral 
Will must be free from external motives, sensuous impulses, 
etc. But he rightly rejected absolute self-determination, which 
means merely caprice, and is devoid of moral quality. There 
must be some standard outside the Will itself. Here we come 
to the " moral ideas " which Herbart enunciated. [Just, p. 280.] 



Natorp 20 1 

Kant's Ethics were the product of an age which strove after 
independence. Morality appeared as mere self-rule or Egoism . 
Nietzsche drew the logical consequence from Kant's system. 
[Willmann, Zeitschrift.] 

(C) The above discussion may appear academic, but it is 
really of deep philosophic interest. Whence are we to derive 
our standard of moral action ? Kant, Herbart, and Natorp 
agree that a mere formless thing like ''pleasure" which may 
arise from any one of a multitude of causes, cannot provide such 
a standard. 

Are we then, with Kant and Natorp, to fall back on a 
formal principle of mere consistency or universality? The 
difficulty here is that an immoral man may be very " consistent" 
indeed. 1 

Herbart was, therefore, driven on to seek some other ground 
for morality, and he found it in the " five moral ideas," in- 
tuitively or aesthetically apprehended. He, like Sidgwick, was 
"forced to recognise the need of a fundamental ethical intui- 
tion ". 2 The two writers are agreed that only by postulating one 
or more spontaneous intuitions, each incapable of logical proof, 
can a moral standard be acquired. The " aesthetic judgments" 
of Herbart are essentially similar in nature to the "intuitive" 
judgments of Sidgwick. 

(8) The Herbartian Theory of the Will considered Psycho- 
logically. The Doctrine of " Faculties ". 

(A) Men frequently regard the faculties of Presentation, 
Feeling, and Will as more or less external to each other. 
Herbart was at great pains to abolish this separation and to 
base mental life on one foundation only — the complex inter- 
action of innumerable presentations. Herbart was correct so 
far as he contended that the three fundamental faculties are not 

1 " The Rational Egoist . . . might accept the Kantian principle and 
remain an Egoist." (Sidgwick, Methods of Ethics, preface.) 
2 Ibid. 



202 The Critics of Herbartianism 

self-sufficient or mutually hostile. Man is never merely a 
presentative, merely a feeling, or merely a volitional being ; all 
three aspects coexist, though one may be predominant. Herbart 
did great service in calling attention to the errors of the vulgar 
" faculty " doctrine. [40.] 

True, his own view is wrong. He makes his presentations 
into powers or activities, and bases Feeling and Will upon them. 
This is to ignore the fact that the latter are as fundamental as 
presentations ; Herbart, however, obscures the illegitimacy of 
his doctrine by constantly regarding presentations as already 
forces or powers. [41.] 

If once we recognise Will as a peculiar content of conscious- 
ness, we must infer that it goes beyond the mere presentation 
of an object in consciousness ; it presses forward beyond the 
sphere of the given. All this is unintelligible on Herbart's 
view, which regards Will as rooted in presentations, and not as 
being a law to itself, and thus " free ". [42-3.] 

(B) When Natorp tries to establish the doctrine of there 
being something peculiar to the Will, he does so by pointing 
out \h.Q supposed endlessness of the Will. I pull my boots on 
in order to go to the post, in order to, . . . in order to . . . 
But this only lands us in the pleasure-theory. [Flugel, pp. 
265-6.] 

(C) It seems impossible to accept Herbart's view of the mind 
as being fundamentally presentational. Why should not Feeling 
and Will be as ultimate as Presentations ? Again, we are 
conscious of the phenomenon mentioned by Natorp — an or- 
ganisation of our whole life in accordance with some voluntary 
plan, a plan which, though modified by new circumstances, is 
not abrogated, but rather receives these circumstances into 
itself. Will does not appear as a mere product of presentations, 
but often as dominating these, and pressing on beyond them. 
It is extremely difficult, on Herbart's theory, to explain the 
unity of consciousness which is manifested in facts like these. 

But the reader of Natorp' s strictures might possibly imagine 



Kunz 203 

that Herbart had been the victim of inadvertence. This was not 
so. His psychology may be wrong, but it was deliberately 
adopted. Herbart saw the fallacy of the vulgar " faculty " doc- 
trine, and also serious pedagogical errors which follow from a 
recognition of distinct "faculties ". Accordingly he sought for a 
unitary principle, and found it (he thought) in presentations. 
Thus his error, if error it is, must not be regarded as one arising 
out of blindness or ignorance. 

After all, the presentational doctrine has much value for the 
teacher. Just as a house builder presupposes that the force of 
gravity will not be absent and that earthquakes and eruptions 
will be absent during the building of a house, so the teacher 
assumes normal conditions in his pupils, and thinks mainly of 
the one factor which is definitely within his own power to confer 
— presentations, which constitute his -bricks and mortar. If the 
child is normal, the normal impulses, etc., will be called forth by 
the presentations. Thus Herbart' s Psychology lays stress pre- 
cisely upon those mental processes which are under the control 
of the teacher. 

These, then, are the main points raised by the controversy be- 
tween Natorp and the Herbartians. However philosophically 
important, they have only an indirect bearing on pedagogical 
questions. Indeed, Natorp makes no pretensions of being an 
educationist, and Professor Eein condemns him on this ground. 



SECTION XIV. 
KUNZ. 

(1900.) 

Reference, 
Kunz. Zur Wilrdigung der Herbart-Zillerschen Pddagogik. Eberle and 
Rickenbach, Einsiedeln, Switzerland, 1900. 

Herbartianism is essentially Protestant in its inception, and 
many of Ziller's proposals bear this fact upon their face. Thus, 



204 The Critics oj Herbartianism 

for example, the recognition of the German Eeformation as a 
distinct "culture stage" would be unwelcome or impossible to 
anyone but a Lutheran. 

A few Boman Catholics have identified themselves with the 
movement, among them Vogt, the successor of Ziller in the 
headship of the Union for Scientific Pedagogy, and Willmann, 
a professor at Prague. Such men would, of course, have to 
withhold approval from certain details of Ziller's plan. 

Some interest may attach itself to a consideration of the point 
of view adopted by intelligent Catholics towards the Herbartian 
system as a whole. 

Director Kunz has many good words to say for the system. 
It is pervaded by a noble spirit, and it stimulates to a deeper 
grasp of the teacher's task, especially to a consideration of how 
to base Instruction on psychological foundations and to carry 
it out with a definite goal in view. It also rightly places religious 
instruction in a central place (except in the first two years, where 
the central matter is not religious). 

But, no system resting on natural Ethics and psychology can 
endure. A divine revelation is necessary if we are to understand 
the human soul, and from it we learn about man's creation in 
God's image, his fall, and his divine goal. Eevelation likewise 
gives us in Jesus Christ the true ideal to set before us. Such 
matters as these cannot be discovered by reason. Pedagogy 
must be based on Theology and Christianity. 

Hence the defect of Herbartianism. To Herbart an act was 
good if it agreed with the five moral ideas ; to Christianity it is 
good if it corresponds to God's will. The aesthetic judgment in 
the one case, God in the other, gives the verdict. To Herbart, 
man is his own lawgiver, and there are no supernatural laws. 

Even Protestants have objected to Herbart' s exclusive stress 
upon the aesthetic judgment ; thus Christinger holds that while 
this judgment can give a motive, belief in God is a far stronger 
one. In reality, Christianity goes far deeper than Herbartianism. 
The real goal of education must be the restoration of the original 
communion with God. 



Kunz 205 



Herbart rather late in life (1831) admitted that Higher help 
was necessary, but both he and his follower Ziller regarded 
religion rather as a complement to morality than as its founda- 
tion. The goal, he says, is strength of character; but surely 
this must rest on Eeligion. Ziller went rather further than 
Herbart and, far more explicitly than his master, regarded the 
goal of education as moral and religious. 

Manjr useful points can be gathered from the Herbartian 
system, but it is essentially Protestant, and quite ignores the 
Catholic sacraments ; while Catholic pedagogy regards these 
latter as communicating supernatural blessing. 

The Herbartians rightly protest against schools which do not 
educate, i.e., form character. They say rightly that knowledge 
without virtue has no value, and that the latter should be the 
one goal of education. But this was no new discovery. The 
old Fathers (Augustine, Gregory, and others) said this. 

Herbart' s psychology deprives the soul of all original powers. 
Character rests on presentations or ideas. But this doctrine 
conflicts with Christian and pre-Christian thought; it destroys 
the freedom of the will and moral responsibility, likewise the 
unity of the person. The mind is but a presentational mechan- 
ism. Herbart expressly approved of Locke's tabula rasa, though 
not in the sense that foreign impressions can be made upon it. 
The materialist says, "Man is a product of parents, etc."; 
Herbart says, " Man is a product of the influence of his outer 
world". The teacher, for Herbart, is no longer a loving gar- 
dener, guiding the unfolding of an inner life, but a technologist 
controlling a machine, or a chemist bringing together and mixing 
certain materials. 

The Herbartians rightly lay stress on Interest, and show how 
by a psychological procedure this is aroused ; here come in the 
" formal steps ". But surely it must not be a balanced Interest ; 
some Interests are more important than others, those of sym- 
pathy are more important than those of knowledge. Especially 
essential are the moral and religious, while Interest in knowledge 
is less important. 

How does Virtue come out of Interest? Here the Herbartians 



206 The Critics of Herbartianism 

overvalue Instruction, for though presentations influence the Will 
they do not compel it. The Will is free, and may go counter 
to insight. 

The scheme of " formal steps" has been but little opposed, 
and on the whole is useful. Kehr, however, has insisted that 
we must not have one model for everything ; each subject and 
each class requires special treatment ; moreover, the scheme 
manifests signs of hairsplitting. The formal steps are based on 
psychological principles, but are inapplicable in some cases, e.g., 
the correction and repetition of exercises ; description ; the work- 
ing over of any material already arranged in encyclopaedic form 
(catechism, Sermon on the Mount, history tables, grammar, 
etc.). 

" Gesinnungsstoff." — This phrase (" character-forming ma- 
terial ") is not well chosen ; it places religious teaching on the 
same level with profane history, whereas it is quite unique, a 
supernatural bread. 

" Culture Stages." — This doctrine is a mere figment. Ziller's 
stages are (1) Darwinian, (2) Protestant, (3) German. But we 
do not agree with "scientific pedagogy," or with the Eeforma- 
tion, or, being Swiss republicans, with German imperialism as 
the one ideal of state life. A child from six to fourteen cannot 
run through many stages of human development, only those 
of childhood. Sallwiirk has rightly contended that the child is 
rooted in the present ; Frohlich, likewise, that the present-day 
Christian view rather than the view of men ages ago should be 
the one given to the child. 

Eein and others have modified Ziller's scheme mainly by 
choosing national culture stages (except in the case of bib- 
lical instruction). But the whole doctrine is dubious. We 
must start from the present, the near. What is early and 
primitive is really far removed from the child, and we should 
never make a spring into the past except (1) when this is 
necessary to explain the present, (2) when points of contact 
already exist in the child's mind. Moreover, many "stages" 
really occur simultaneously. 

Ziller's detailed scheme is defective in the following aspects. 



Kunz 207 

(1) The fairy tales are not primitive, but very late material. 

(2) Children know that these stories are untrue ; what im- 
pression, then, will be made? 

(3) The stories delight and rouse the imagination, but have 
no religious value ; often they are immoral. The baptized 
child has a right to Christian teaching. It is true, Ziller and 
Eein propose that there should be "children's services" devoid 
of systematic instruction ; but surely instruction is necessary for 
any real influence to be exerted. And it is not true that biblical 
stories, properly selected, are too hard for children. True, even 
fairy tales sometimes have a moral kernel. 

(4) Eobinson Crusoe is a late and foreign story, and is beyond 
the interest of seven to eight year old children. Many Zil- 
lerians reject it. Willmann does, on the ground that it is neither 
classical nor national ; it deals with foreign regions and must in 
any case be seriously modified before being used. Still, it has 
its value as material for free reading with pupils of ten to twelve. 

The very early history of the world has no place in the Zillerian 
plan of Bible study, which begins with the patriarchs ; but surely 
this history is essential. The Zillerians omit it because they 
cannot force it into their eight stages. 

Only one year for Catechism ! Surely this would be in- 
adequate even if all the preceding years had been a preparation 
for it. 

The Niebelungen song may be useful for upper schools, but is 
scarcely so for the people's school, least of all for the lower 
grades (third and fourth years). The notion that love rewards 
with suffering is beyond young children. Moreover, though 
there is exemplified much fidelity, courage, etc., the song 
abounds also in betrayal, hate, revenge, etc. 

There is no repetition in the Zillerian plan ; each year 
involves fresh work. Surely, Christ ought to be the centre of 
all, not the mere end of the course. Dorpfeld himself admits 
that there is some need of repetition, such as occurs in the 
plan of "concentric circles". 

The notion of concentration is good, but on Ziller's plan there 
is an actual tearing asunder of material, though at times Ziller 



208 The Critics of Herbartianism 

admitted (here contradicting himself) that each department of 
study must assert its independent claims. 

Eein and others have modified some of Ziller's details. 
Gesinnungs-unterricht has to be a centre for the geography, 
nature study, and language study. But only in the first year is 
arithmetic connected up with Gesinnungs-unterricht ; drawing 
only in the first three years ; singing not at all except so far as 
the words are concerned. Beal connections are largely ignored 
in Ziller's plan. Interest is deadened ; monotony is produced ; 
the lesson is split into tiny units. 

Surely spatial matters (geography and natural knowledge) 
form a better basis than temporal matters (history and nar- 
ratives). Every action presupposes a place. The Zillerian 
plan has been condemned by Bartels, Frick, Stoy, Frohlich, 
Weissmer, Wehmann, Wesendonck, Euegg, Sallwiirk, and 
others. 

The goal aimed at by Ziller can be reached in another way 
— by ethical concentration. Moral and religious matters must 
always be kept in the forefront. The religious standpoint gives 
us an ideal point of view and a deep grasp of all other subjects. 
A world-view must pervade everything ; religious instruction 
must not be isolated. 

Natural concentration is good ; related departments may be 
unified. The reading book is valuable as connecting instruction 
in language with instruction in things. 

Ziller's plan is quite impracticable ; it demands eight years 
and a separate teacher for each. What about schools which 
have only one class ? It is true Hollkamm has tried to apply 
Zillerianism even here, dividing the course into four sections and 
various subsections, and combining the catechism stage with 
biblical history. 



APPENDIX. 

PROFESSOR DARROCH ON HERBARTIANISM. 

Quite recently a British critic has appeared 1 in the person of Mr. 
(now Professor) Darroch, who, apparently since the present writer's 
visit to the University of Edinburgh in the autumn of 1901, has 
realised the capacities of the subject that had been already, at that 
time, avowedly selected for research by the visitor. 

The most prominent feature of Mr. Darroch's criticism is its per- 
sistent irrelevancy. Acquainted with the objections raised by Lotze to 
Herbart's psychology (these are given here under " Ostermann "), Mr. 
Darroch reproduces them at some length under the impression that he 
is thus damaging Herbart's pedagogy. The psychology is, according 
to him, the foundation of the pedagogy. The latter is " derived," 
"deduced," or " developed " from the former, which is its "starting- 
point," the " point of departure," containing the " original assumptions " 
upon which the pedagogy is " based " or " ostensibly founded ". Would 
any reader believe, after this, that, as a matter of fact, Herbart's psychology 
was elaborated years after his chief educational works were written '? 

Professor James is right. " Even where, as in the case of Herbart, 
the advancer of the art of teaching was also a psychologist, the peda- 
gogics and the psychology ran side by side, and the former was not 
derived in any sense from the latter." 2 Moreover the present writer 
had already hinted that " Herbart's presentational mechanism was by 
no means the starting-point of his educational proposals ". 3 The whole 
question is dealt with somewhat fully in the present work. 4 

It should not, however, be inferred that Mr. Darroch has completely 



1 Herbart ; a Criticism (Longmans, 1903) ; also Journal of Education, 
March, 1903. 

2 Talks with Teachers, p. 8. 

3 The Student's Herbart, p. 8. 4 Pp. 28-32. 

14 



Appendix 



ignored The Student's Herbart. That little work, with its list of twenty 
or more objections to Herbartianism collected after considerable study of 
German educational literature, has clearly proved of immense service 
to him. Mr. Darroch never admits this service, his only references to 
the work being hostile. But his respect for the book is such that not 
only does he apparently reproduce one after another its arguments and 
ideas, but he does so even when these arguments and ideas are perhaps 
of dubious validity. 

A few of the following instances may be irrelevant —of that the reader 
must judge ; but the rest are surely obvious enough ; and, as Mr. 
Darroch has chosen to criticise The Student's Herbart, a reply from the 
author of that book will not be out of place. 

The one writer speaks of " an apperceiving machine which responds 
smoothly and immediately" (p. 53); the other follows suit with "an 
apperceiving machine which responds easily and smoothly" (p. 41). 
The one writer points out that " two opposite dangers face our schools," 
the first represented by " heuristic " advocates, the second by the 
"didactic materialism" to which Herbartianism in some of its forms 
may perhaps tend, and goes on to say that " educationists must avoid 
both extremes," seeing that "mental life is rhythmic" (pp. 25-26); the 
other writer follows suit with, " As, on the one hand, the Herbartians 
lay the emphasis upon the one aspect of our mental life, so in like 
manner the extreme advocates of the heuristic method lay the emphasis 
on the other, but the truth lies in neither extreme, but in realising 
clearly the twofold aspect of all intellectual process " (p. 44 ; stultified 
on p. 123). The one writer quotes the objection that a robber exem- 
plifies the "second moral idea " (p. 50); the other follows suit with 
"the successful swindler and cracksman" (p. 75). The one writer 
complains that " even the much vaunted ' Nature Study ' . may be 
scrappy and ineffective " (p. 54) ; the second is tortured by the fact that 
" there is at the present day so much teaching of nature knowledge and 
of elementary science of a purely desultory kind " (p. 100). The one 
writer refers to Professor Patrick Geddes as an advocate of placing 
Nature Study " at the centre of the circle of knowledge " (p. 74) ; the 
second writer — apparently regarding his countryman as a representative 
Herbartian — speaks of " some enthusiasts " who would " make Nature 
Study the centre of the circle of knowledge " (p. 131 ; also p. 144), the 
plain truth being that no avowed Herbartian has ever made such a pro- 
posal. The one writer refers to Miss Eavenhill's advocacy of the claims 
of Hygiene (p. 74) ; the second seems to dignify her likewise with Her- 
bartian honours (p. 144). The one writer, omitting the original meaning 
of " didactic materialism " (the term was invented by Dorpfeld to stand 



Appendix 211 



for the blind polic}^ of heaping up subject after subject in response to 
utilitarian, ecclesiastical and other demands), uses the term in a siightly 
and allowably modified sense (p. 25) ; the second writer faithfully 
follows suit with the same omission and the same definition ; 1 " didactic 
materialism," says the one, "is a belief in quantity apart from quality" 
(p. 21) ; says the other, " it looks to the quantity of knowledge acquired 
rather than to its quality" (p. 108). The first writer ventured on a 
new and possibly erroneous interpretation of Herbart's Ethics, regarding 
it as an attempt to expand the concept of Virtue by the inclusion of 
elements "not always included" in that concept (p. 40); the second 
writer discovers that Herbart, " as it seems to me rightiy, extends the 
conception (of morality) to include more than mere goodness " (p. 66). 
The first writer describes the " second moral idea " as " puzzling " (p. 40) ; 
by some strange fatality the second writer also finds it " somewhat 
difficult to understand " (p. 73). Still, when the first writer, beginning 
to see daylight, suggests that the idea stands for " greatness, or at least 
a notion very much like it," in fact for " strength and richness of mind " 
(pp. 40-1), the second also describes it as one ot "greatness " or " strength 
of character" (p. 74), in this case inserting quotation marks (though 
without giving the source of his quotation. When the one writer, 
making a possibly erroneous conjecture, said, "Herbart felt that moral 
reformers were too negative in their views," their chief message being 
" avoid — avoid — avoid " (p. 42), he was attempting, on his own account, 
an interpretation of the historical genesis of " second moral idea " which, 

1 Not that Mr. Darroch never strays into originality. He invents the 
hybrid " didactive " ; he gives an alternative metaphysical explanation of 
the term " materialism " (p. 21), an explanation which the inventor Dorpfeld 
would have smiled at ; lastly he avows that " one section of the (Herbartian) 
school" has already "logically reached" the standpoint of "didactic 
materialism". It was rather questionable policy on the part of the pre- 
sent writer to claim that Herbartianism itself might tend towards " didactic 
materialism," the term itself having been invented by an Herbartian as 
one condemnatory of a system against which Herbartianism was a protest : 
however, questionable or not, the second writer follows suit, and even brings 
into existence a "section" of the school which has already reached, by a 
"logical process," the standpoint here referred to (p. 108). Will Mr. 
Darroch give some information as to the whereabouts of this "section," 
so completely unknown to the present writer ? A subtle and quite pro- 
blematic tendency is one thing ; an arrival by " logical " process is another. 
There is not, and there never has been, a single Herbartian who has ever 
" logically reached " the standpoint of " didactic materialism " ; Mr. Darroch 
is here challenged to mention one. 



2i2 Appendix 



whether correct or not as an interpretation, was at any rate novel. In 
point of fact he knew as little as Mr. Darroch as to the actual motives 
and convictions which led Herbart to the enunciation of his system of 
Ethics. However, it is satisfactory to know that the second writer sup- 
ports — though without referring the interpretation to its original source 
— the view put forward by his predecessor. " Herbart," says Mr. Darroch, 
" insists on the positive aspect of virtue ; it is not a mere not-doing, but 
a doing "(p. 70). 

Again and again the arguments and counter-arguments of The Student's 
Herbart seem to be reproduced by Mr. Darroch without any acknowledg- 
ment of their origin. The one writer warns against confusing pleasantry 
with Interest (p. 51) ; the other feels called upon to utter a similar warning 
(p. 46). The one writer defends Herbart against the " robber " argument 
by pointing out that " the robber is not moral, for there is a ' third moral 
idea' namely Benevolence, and a 'fourth moral idea' namely Justice, 
and two others " (p. 50) ; the other writer reproduces this without quoting 
his source : " against the criticism of Herbart it has been more than once 
advanced 1 that we must take into account the other moral ideas. . . . 
For Herbart also laid down that we should aim at Benevolence, at 
Justice, at Equity" (p. 76). The one writer, in his list of supposed 
errors in Herbartianism, says, " Herbartianism confuses culture and 
many-sided Interest with Virtue " (p. 86) ; the second is harrowed by 
the thought that " the Herbartian theory tends to identify virtue with 
culture" (p. 83). The one writer points out that Herbartians, in the 
eyes of some people, " undervalue difficult formal studies " (pp. 88-9) and 
" lay too great stress on Instruction " (p. 87) ; the second writer bewails 
that " along with the overvaluing of instruction we have the under- esti- 
mation, and, in some cases, the almost total neglect of formal studies " 
(p. 112). The one writer replies to his own objection — that there may 
be in Herbartianism a subtle tendency towards " didactic materialism " 
— by referring to the " formal steps " as a proof that the Herbartians 
are no mere pilers-up of indiscriminate knowledge (pp. 53, 89); the 
other writer's exposition takes the same direction : "the Herbartian may 
reply : what about the five formal steps of method which form an in- 
tegral and fundamental part in the theory ? " (p. 109). The one writer, 
after discussing Ziller's plan of " concentration," concludes that we must 
"keep in close touch with each other those subjects which throw light 
upon each other " (p. 67) or " belong to each other " (p. 72) — " we must 

1 "More than once." Yes, in Germany. Phrases like these, so suggestive 
of an encyclopaedic study of Herbartianism, are characteristic of Mr, 
Darroch's work. See p. 74, "Napoleon and Bacon". 



Appendix 213 



follow wherever the laws of Association naturally lead us" (p. 73) ; the 
second writer, posing as a "critic of Herbartianism," comes to the same 
conclusion : " the only safe rule for the teacher is that wherever there 
is or has been real relation between two facts or groups of facts the 
nature of the relation should be unfolded and enforced " (p. 133). The 
one writer warns against the artificial forms of " concentration " which 
would "divorce materials which should naturally be united together" 
(p. 67) ; the second warns against "bonds of an imaginary nature " and 
urges us to be " sure that there is, or has been, a real connection between 
the facts which he seeks to conjoin" (pp. 146-7). The one writer urges that 
"subjects differ greatly in importance" (p. 73), some being of " supreme," 
others of " moderate," others of " small " importance (p. 22) ; the second 
writer is impressed by the fact that " some subjects are more valuable in 
the education of the child than others" (p. 145) and traces the recogni- 
tion of this truth to the enunciation of the "concentration" principle. 

Mr. Darroch introduces an occasional variation by, to all appearance, 
borrowing ideas from other writers than the present. Page 100 is a 
supreme exani|)le of his powers. The first complete thought is from 
The Student's Herbart, the next two are based on Professor Adams's 
chapters "Formal Education" and "Observation," and the last two 
on Professor James's chapter "Apperception". "Apperception," says 
the latter, "means nothing more than the act of taking a thing into 
the mind." "Apperception," says Mr. Darroch, after having impressed 
the same lesson as his American original, "means nothing more than 
the act of taking a thing into the mind," an act which, clearly, Mr. 
Darroch is well able to perform. He, at any rate, does not despise 
" Instruction ". 

Idea after idea, argument after argument, conclusion after conclusion, 
even phrase after phrase, does Mr. Darroch seem to borrow — almost ex- 
clusively from Herbartian writers ; but his only references to the men 
who have saved his book from vacuity are hostile. 

What is the conclusion of the matter ? Mr. Darroch has nothing fresh, 
original, or stimulating to present to the teachers of Britain. His 
criticisms of Herbartianism are either irrevelant or antiquated. His 
positive suggestions are mainly those made by the present writer 
several months before his own essays appeared, or by other Herbartian 
or semi-Herbartian writers. Surely it is not right — not fair — for men to 
borrow suggestion after suggestion from a system and then profess to be 
its critics. Yet, after all, these critics are, though unwillingly, witnesses 
for the defence ; whenever they prepare to grapple with practical 
educational problems they cannot help first refreshing themselves from 
the Herbartian spring. 



214 Appendix 



The writer has no objection to Mr. Darroch, or any one else, using 
his work, but he thinks the bounds of legitimate use are passed when 
no acknowledgment is made, and when, to cover the service, an attack 
is made upon the very book that has proved so serviceable. The public 
must judge. 

After all, Herbartianism works. Education is more an art than a 
science, and a system of education must be judged by its fruits. Perus- 
ing such a work as Mr. Darroch's, an Herbartian will impatiently re- 
call the words of Edmund Burke : " Applaud us when we run ; console 
us when we fall ; cheer us when we recover ; but let us pass on — for 
God's sake let us pass on ". x 

P.S. — Mr. Darroch's reply is that his Journal of Education article 
was printed before the University booksellers at Edinburgh procured 
The Student's Herbart. Comment on this is hardly necessary in view of 
the facts (1) that the quotations given above are entirely taken from 
Mr. Darroch's book, not his article ; (2) that his book followed The 
Student's Herbart at an interval of six months ; (3) that in it he refers 
three times by name to The Student's Herbart. 

The fact is, Mr. Darroch wrote in a hurry, and did not do justice 
either to himself or to the men from whom he hastily gathered ideas. 
He is surely capable of better things than this. 



Speech at Bristol, 1780. 



INDEX I. 



Herbart, life of, 37-9. 
Herbartianism 

as left by Herbart, 39-43. 

its unpretentious position at his 
death, 39, 43-4. 

attitude of Stoy and his followers, 
45-6. 

attitude of Dorpfeld, 47-9. 

leading doctrines of Ziller, 53-6. 

rupture between the Zillerians and 
the other Herbartians, 45-6, 51, 
57-8. 

Herbartianism outside of Ger- 
many, 52, 56-7, 62, 75-6. 

controversies over Herbartianism, 
56. 

reasons for the influence of Her- 
bartianism, 52, 57. 

present position of Herbartianism 
in Germany, 65-9. 

in Britain, 69-75. 

v. Frobelianism, 30, 55, 83, 85, 
96. 

unpractical or overpractical ? 102, 
107, 108, 112, 129, 155-6, 160-1, 
166, 167. 

and physical facts and culture, 
102. 

Christianity and religious instruc- 
tion, 104, 106, 107, 109, 112, 114, 
115, 157, 167, 204. 

admitted excellences, 105-6, 111, 
125, 147, 204. 

reactionary elements, 110, 128-9, 
129, 164, 167. 
The Moral Significance of Herbar- 
tianism, 5-19 (especially 8, 18), 
84, 87, 195. 

moral importance of ideas owing 
to their connection with Voli- 
tion, 4, 7, 10, 17, 27, 41, 47, 92, 
103, 124, 129. 



TJie Moral Significance of Herbar- 
tianism (continued). 

generation of Virtue out of ideas 
by way of Apperception and In- 
terest, 6-7, 12, 15, 18, 19, 40, 56, 
91, 146, 190-1, 197-9. 

generation of Vice out of ignorance 
or poverty of ideas, 7, 9-10, 11, 
12, 13, 15, 17, 91, 191. 

evil an effect, not an entity, 10-13. 

Habit v. Insight, 3-4, 92, 101, 124, 
129, 170. 

the Interest doctrine, 6, 7, 8, 9, 
18, 40, 45, 56, 72, 91, 105, 111, 
113, 123, 157-8, 159-60, 169, 190, 
196-7, 197-8, 205. 

Herbartianism a gospel of positive 
moral reform, 9, 10, 11, 86, 198-9. 

" Educative instruction " versus 
"technological instruction," 50, 
87, 91, 102, 110, 111, 112. 113, 
156, 161, 167, 169, 175, 194-5, 
196-7, 205. 

Herbartianism and " soft peda- 
gogics " ; supposed absence of 
strenuousness, 19, 75, 96, 100, 
101, 162, 171, 175-6. 

Herbartianism and the gymnastic 
doctrine or fallacy, 20, 21, 22-3, 
85, 88-9, 96-7, 161, 162, 163. 
Herbart's Ethics, 42-3. 

apparent artificiality of Herbart's 
ethics ; absence of unity, 32, 99, 
103, 123. 

Herbart and Sidgwick, 33, 201. 

the "second moral idea" and its 
importance, 11, 12, 100, 102. 

no "moral idea" valid in isola- 
tion, 12, 100-1. 

Herbart's Ethics based on " taste " 
or the " aesthetic judgment," 99, 
101, 122, 123, 136, 149, 153, 200, 



2l6 



Index 



Herbart's Ethics (continued). 

character the one end of educa- 
tion, 39, 53, 87, 102, 194-9. 

inability to give practical guidance, 
99. 

the five ideas not co-ordinate, 100. 

criticism of the "five ideas," 100- 
101. 

Determinism and Libertarianism, 
5, 122, 134, 141, 146-7, 179, 205. 
Herbart's Psychology and Philo- 
sophy. 

metaphysical doctrine, 99, 118, 
181. 

his Presentationalism versus a 
Spiritualistic Psychology, 4-5, 
28-9, 39, 101, 112, 118-23, 131-5, 
179, 201-3, 205. 

possible weaknesses, 4, 20, 21, 29- 
31, 32, 33, 64, 104, 112, 118-25, 
133-5, 155, 201-3. 

the "faculty" doctrine, 39, 112, 
121, 123, 133-5, 157, 201-3, 205. 

Herbart's educational doctrines 
not deduced from his psychology, 
31, 38, 65, Appendix. - 

value of Presentationalism for 
educational purposes, 28-31, 32, 
33, 40, 83, 84. 

consequent value of Instruction 
in the Herbartian system; the 
" content " of studies, the con- 
ferring of knowledge, are impor- 
tant, 40-1, 84-5, 86, 88-9, 92, 95, 
102, 103, 104-5, 110, 113, 121, 
123, 143, 156, 161, 169, 173, 196, 
205-6. 

place of Discipline and Training 
in the Herbartian system, 42, 92, 
101, 110, 146, 156, 170, 173, 191, 
193-4, 195-6. 

vitality of Presentationalism, 31. 

Presentationalism, Heredity, 
Physiology and Physical Edu- 
cation, 29, 40-1, 94, 133, 155, 
160, 166, 167, 169-70. 

punishments, 105, 193-4. 

relation of feelings to ideas, 32, 
121-2, 124. 

uselessness of working merely on 
the feelings, 23, 125. 

" developing -presentative Instruc- 
tion," 21, 170-1, 173-7. 



Herbart's Psychology and Philosophy 

(continued). 
Didactic Materialism, Didactic 

Formalism, 20-1, 48, 84, 86, 93, 

95, 113, 161, 162, 171. 
Apperception. 

meaning of, 41, 118. 

significance of, 14-17. 

relation to Anschauung, 36-7, 41, 

188. 
relation to Association, 83-4. 
relation to Interest and Attention, 

16-17, 92, 105, 118. 
" Gesinnungsstoff" (= humanistic 

material). 
importance of, 8, 26, 53-4, 72-3, 87, 

91, 92, 94-5, 110, 161, 168, 206. 
neglect of, 13, 14, 72-3. 
The " Formal Steps 7 ' of Instruction, 

21, 23-4, 41-2, 45, 49, 56, 87-8, 95, 

97, 106, 111, 117, 124, 125-30, 162, 

164, 167-8, 171, 174-5, 177, 205-6. 
modifications and dangers of, 24, 

87, 117, 126-30, 162. 
inapplicable to the teaching of 

dexterities, 74, 87, 127. 
inapplicable to certain other cases, 

126, 206. 
The Doctrine of " Culture Stages," 

14, 26, 45, 48, 54, 71-2, 95, 109, 

113-6, 123, 148-54, 158, 168, 197, 

206. 
scientific basis of the doctrine, 26- 

7, 95, 113, 148, 148-51, 172. 
"fairy tales," the Odyssey, etc., 

27, 43, 48, 55, 87, 91, 94, 95, 106, 

109, 114, 125, 149, 153-4, 158, 

168, 172, 207. 
Eobinson Crusoe, 27, 55, 94, 109, 

114, 149, 154, 158, 168, 172, 207. 
The Old Testament, 154. 
postponement and abbreviation of 

the life of Christ, 27, 48, 110, 

115, 150, 168, 207. 

the ^Reformation stage, 55, 110, 

114-5. 
advantages, 48. 
difficulties, 48, 55, 109-10, 113-6, 

123, 149-50, 158, 164-5, 167-8, 

172, 206-7. 
repetition ignored, 171, 207. 
" concentric circles," 48, 62, 114, 

116, 173, 207. 



Index 



217 



The Doctrine of " Concentration" 24, 

45-6, 47, 53-4, 58, 88-90, 91-2, 94- 

5, 106, 110, 116-7, 123, 149, 158, 

168, 173, 207-8. 
need for " concentration," 24, 54, 

89, 91-2, 94-5. 
two interpretations, 24-5. 
increasing recognition of the need 

for unification of studies, 24-5, 

70, 92. 
limits of " concentration," 90, 

116. 
" concentration " according to 

Ziiler, 25-6, 54. 



Tlie Doctrine of " Concentration " 

{continued). 

difficulties and modifications of 

Ziller's scheme, 26, 59, 108-9, 

116, 161, 208. 

" concentration," according to 

Dorpfeld, 26, 47. 
" concentration " according to 

Stoy, 45-6. 
" concentration " according to Dr. 

Findlay, 88. 
rational concentration, 26. 
The teaching of dexterities, 87. 
Practical pursuits, 89, 91. 



INDEX II. 

References to Herbart and Ziller are, except in a few instances, omitted. 



ACKERMANN, 57, 69. 

Adams, 5, 7, 19, 21, 33, 61, 71, 74, 

82-6, Appendix. 
Adler, 71. 
Andreas, 59. 
Armstrong, 20, 24, 70. 
Arnold, 10-11. 
Augustine, 205. 

Bacon, 157. 

Ballauf, 121, 122. 

Bartels, 19, 26, 34, 58, 62, 112-7, 208. 

Earth, 51, 57. 

Bell, 37. 

Bell, Canon, 71. 

Benson, 20. 

Bergemann, 34, 65, 169-73. 

Beyer, 57, 60, 69, 150-1, 152. 

Bliedner, 57. 

Branford, 70. 

Burke, 8, Appendix. 

Butler, 101. 

Christinger, 19, 34, 166-9, 204. 

Cicero, 157. 

Clement, 71. 

Clifton, Bishop of, 8. 

Cobbe, Miss, 15. 

Comenius, 23, 105, 113, 116, 117, 125, 

162. 
Conrad, 57. 
Cornelius, 43, 185. 
Credner, 57. 

Darroch, Preface and Appendix. 

Darwin, 151. 

De Garmo, 69, 74, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81-2, 

96-7. 
Dewey, 76, 



Dickens, 157. 

Diesterweg, 113. 

Dittes, 12, 19, 34, 59, 98-106, 111,112, 

180, 183. 
Dodd.28, 69, 71, 74, 75,93-5. 
Dorpfeld, 22, 24, 26, 35, 39, 50, 56, 57, 

66, 78, 80, 87-9, 94, 114, 116, 128, 

164, 176, 207. 

— Life of, 46-7. 

— Doctrines of, 47-9. 
Drews, 163-6. 
Drobisch, 43. 

Eckoff, 75, 79. 

Felkin, 2, 38, 42, 74, 78, 80. 
Fennel, 97. 

Fichte, 37, 138, 181, 186, 187. 
Findlay, 5, 7, 26, 53, 70, 74, 86-90, 

127. 
Florin, 59. 
Fliigel, 30, 57, 64, 65, 67, 98, 180, 

183-4, 200, 202. 
Foltz, 176. 

Frick, 57, 69, 82, 208. 
Frobel, 30, 36, 83, 85, 92, 96, 169. 
Frohlich, 57, 58, 59, 60, 98, 99, 109, 

113, 206, 208. 

Geddes 79 

Glockner, 98, 103, 104, 105, 106. 

Goethe, 54, 71. 

Gopfert, 62. 

Grabs, 57. 

Gray, 12, 13. 

Gregory, 205. 

Hall, 71. 

Hayward, 6, 11, 25, 27, 67, 72, 74, 82. 



220 



Index 



Herbart, 2, 3, 4, 6, 19, 23, 24, 26, etc. 

— Life of, 36-9. 

— Doctrines of, 39-43. 
Heyn, 66-7. 
Hollkamm, 208. 
Hubatsch, 22, 34, 154-62. 

James, 4, 5, 17, 19, 82, Appendix. 
Just, 57,' 63, 65, 69, 98, 101, 102, 103, 
104, 180, 188-9, 200. 

Kant, 38, 138, 139, 178, 181, 186, 195, 

199-201. 
Kehr, 206. 
Kern, 57. 
Klemm, 56, 69. 
Koch, 184. 
Kunz, 203-8. 
Kuoni, 62. 

Lange, A. F., 78. 

Lange, K., 57, 69, 74, 75, 80. 

Laurie, 70. 

Lazarus, Preface, 43. 

Lentz, 116. 

Lessing, 71. 

Linde, 34, 173-7. 

Locke, 2, 40, 113, 179, 205. 

Lodge, 20. 

Lotze, 20, 180. 

Luther, 113. 

Mager, 43. 
McMurray, 75. 
Menard, 151. 
Meredith, 11. 
Mulliner, 74, 79. 
Munk, 155. 
Miinsterberg, 31, 184. 
Myers, 10. 

Nahlowsky, 43, 185. 

Nathan, 122. 

Natorp, 1, 4, 30, 31, 34, 64, 178-203. 

Niederer, 187, 188. 

Niederley, 57. 

Niemeyer, 36, 37, 105, 113. 

Nietzsche, 201. 

Ostermann, 10, 23, 31, 32, 34, 63-4, 
112, 117-25, 180, 183. 

Parker, 75, 82. 



Perry, 70. 

Pestalozzi, 36, 37, 38, 44, 79, 102, 105, 

113, 130, 131, 138-47, 180, 181, 
185-8, 195, 196. 

Pickel, 57. 
Plato, 3. 
Potter, 71. 

Rein, 18, 29, 34, 57, 59, 60, 65, 69, 74, 
80, 86, 114, 128, 150, 175, 180, 
184, 185, 187, 190, 193, 196-7, 
203, 206, 207, 208. 

Richter, 24, 34, 128-30. 

Rissmann, 63. 

Rooper, Preface, 12, 90-3. 

Rousseau, 36, 115, 153. 

Ruegg, 208. 

Ruskin, 15, 100. 

Sallwurk, 26, 57, 58, 59, 69, 98, 113, 

114, 147-54, 206, 208. 
Sander, 58. 

Schiller, 195. 
Schleiermacher, 181, 182. 
Schmidt, 177. 
Schumann, 57. 
Seneca, 157. 
Shurman, 19. 
Sidgwick, 33, 189, 201. 
Smith, 79. 

Socrates, 3, 157, 163. 
Spencer, 54-5, 71, 96. 
Staude, 57, 66, 113, 128, 129, 150. 
Stead, 73. 
Steiger, 37, 78. 
Steinthal, 43. 
Stout, 31. 

Stoy, 38, 39, 51, 56, 57, 82, 98, 112, 
208. 

— Life of, 44-5. 

— Doctrines of, 45-6. 
Striimpell, 43, 57, 122, 184, 185. 

Tennyson, Preface, 13. 
Thilo, 57, 98, 99. 
Thrandorf, 57, 60. 

— and Meltzer, 66. 
Thring, 5, 21. 
Trendlenburg, 180. 
Triiper, 184. 

Uper, 69, 74, 75, 80, 184. 



Index 



221 



Van Liew, 42, 80. 

Vogel, 35, 130-47, 180. 

Vogt, 56, 57, 58, 60, 112, 114, 204. 

Voigt, 2, 81. 

Volkmann, 43, 185. 

Voltaire, 157. 



Waitz, 43, 185. 
Wehmann, 208. 
Weissmer, 208. 
Wesendonck, 34, 51, 

208. 
Wiessner, 57. 
Wiget, 57, 62, 187. 



59, 63, 107-12, 



Willmann, 56, 63, 65, 150, 201, 204, 

207. 
Wundt, 119. 

Ziller, 14, 23, 24, 26, 27, 38, 39, 54, 
56, 57, 59, etc. 

— Life of, 49-53. 

— Characteristics, 49-53, 107. 

— Doctrines of, 53-6. 

— on school organisation, 107. 

— on modern languages, 107-8. 

— on inductive methods of lan- 

guage-teaching, 108. 
Zillig, 57, 60. 
Zinser, 80. 



THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS LIMITED. 



BY THElSAME AUTHOR 

THE REFORM OF I0RAL AND BIBLICAL EDUCATION 

ON THE LINES OF HERBARTIANISM, CRITICAL THOUGHT 
AND THE ETHICAL NEEDS OP THE PRESENT DAY. 



EDUCATION. — "An extremely clever, even brilliant book ; also distinctly novel 
and — we feel tempted to say — therefore, distinctly welcome. . . . Interesting from 
cover to cover." 

WESTERN TIMES. — " Almost as exciting and exhilarating as Jules Verne. . . . 
An admirable volume of exposure and suggestion." 

THE SCHOOL WORLD.— " This book, as we should have expected, is interesting 
from cover to cover. . . . There was room for Dr. Hay ward's book, and with the 
main contentions we are wholly in agreement. ... A thorough lighting book." 

WESTMINSTER REYIEW.— "The newly constituted authorities must stand in 
need of help and guidance in arranging their schemes for instruction in elementary 
schools, and we learn from Mr. Frank H. Hayward how urgent this need is. . . . 
We unhesitatingly urge all teachers and all members of committees of management 
to study his book." 

TIMES. — "Dr. Hayward is an Herbartian and an enthusiast who is aghast at 
the lack of method and enlightenment in the teaching of religion and the training 
of character, especially in primary schools. His solution of the religious difficulty 
is ' Neither Church nor Dissent, but Educationists, ' and this maxim he urges in a 
number of racy chapters criticising the present practice, and giving a useful 
'Scheme of Instruction'." 

THE LITERARY WORLD.— " The Moral Instruction League can congratulate 
itself on having a protagonist so able and so fearless." 

Mr. W. T. STEAD in the " Review of Reviews ". — " Mr. Hayward has flung into 
the educational arena one of the brightest, brainiest and breeziest books that it has 
been my good fortune to read for some time. ... It would be easy to fill pages 
with extracts from his incisive and audacious frontal attack upon the system of 
instruction which both the defenders and the opponents of the Education Act seem 
to regard as beyond criticism." 

WESTERN DAILY MERCURY.— " A bold book, an outspoken book. There is 
audacity in its views and its language, but it is the audacity of an apostle's fervour. 
... A book emphatically worth the reading." 

WEDNESBURY HERALD.—" The writer is a perfect master of his subject. The 
book ought to be read at this juncture by every teacher in day and Sunday schools, 
by members of town and county councils, and all to whom the new Education Act 
appeals for the exercise of some amount of common-sense in putting this much- 
neglected branch of education upon a proper footing." 

WESTERN MORNING NEWS.— "We would urge every one interested in educa- 
tion to examine Mr. Hayward's scheme." 

SCOTSMAN. — "An able study of the remediable errors in existing methods of 
education." 

YORKSHIRE POST. — "Mr. Hayward's book contains much sound criticism and 
advice, and many original suggestions ; it is conceived in the right spirit and 
appears at the right time." 

BRISTOL TIMES. — "An original work by Dr. Hayward which cannot be too 
widely read. His arm stretches wide and his spade digs deep, and there is probably 
not an educationist living who would not find therein innumerable suggestions." 

WESTERN DAILY PRESS.— "It is a bold step he has taken, but it may fairly 
be said that he has laid his plans on a broad and, as far as possible, inoffensive 
basis. . . . He does not deal merely in generalities. He has set forth a scheme of 
character-forming instruction which must have been the work of much labour and 
time. . . . Dr. Hayward's book is very readable." 

GLASGOW HERALD. — "The book contains a very well-informed discussion of 
this subject, and presents in a remarkably vivid way many topics well worthy of 
the serious consideration of teachers and school managers." 

DUNDEE ADVERTISER.— " Apart from its important subject, this book is 
written in a very lively style. . . . Every school board member should peruse this 
volume, if it be only for the purpose of mortifying the flesh by taking the conceit 
out of himself." 



THE REFORM OF MORAL AND BIBLICAL mm\m~-cmtinued. 

BRISTOL MERCURY (Leading Article). — "A well-studied contribution to the 
science of education in the domain which alone gives real trouble." 

EAST ANGLIAN DAILY TIMES.— " The Herbartian doctrine or method . . . 
is presented by Mr. Hayward, in the constructive portion of his work, with an 
attractiveness which some will lind irresistible." 

NEW AGE. — "Some admirable criticisms on present-day methods of moral and 
religious teaching. . . . We commend this volume to the serious attention of school 
managers and teachers. " 

THE PRESIDENT ELECT OF THE NATIONAL UNION OF TEACHERS (G. 
Sharpies, Esq.), who quoted from the book at the Buxton Conference, says : 
" No book has moved me so profoundly for many years as this startling work. It 
should be read by every educationist in the country." 

ETHICS. — "We can strongly recommend it. Its exposure of the utter inade- 
quacy of present educational methods towards moral ends is most scathing. . . . 
The book is packed with useful information, proceeds from a scholarly mind, has 
moral power, and has many practical and detailed suggestions in the direction of 
reform." 

THE STUDENT'S HERBART. 

A BRIEF EDUCATIONAL MONOGRAPH DEALING WITH THE 
SYSTEM INITIATED BY HERBART AND DEVELOPED BY 
STOY, DORPEELD AND ZILLER. 



Professor ADAMS, Professor of Education in the University of London, 

writes: "I read with much interest your Student's Herbart. It is an admirable 
bird's-eye view of the Herbartian Pedagogy, and cannot fail to be of great service 
to students. Perhaps its most valuable feature is the perspective it affords of the 
important and the unimportant. The selection and arrangement are excellent. 
For the size of the book it is amazingly complete. You have certainly rendered a 
great service to the theory of education in England by giving us this brightly 
written and instructive monograph. I look forward with much interest to your 
promised work on the Critics of Herbartianism." 

EDUCATION. — "The terse, direct and forceful manner in which Dr. Hayward 
tells us what he has to say attracts and rivets one's attention. . . . We trust that 
those who have not yet perused its pages will do so." 

THE LITERARY WORLD. — "A concise and lucid exposition of the great re- 
former's principles which are winning more and more enthusiastic adherents in the 
ranks of educationists." 

UNIVERSITY EXTENSION JOURNAL.— "This delightful little book. . . . 
Written in a clear, popular manner, it will do much to enable the student of 
Herbartian literature to grasp the main principles of the great master, and 
appreciate the changes which have been introduced by modern writers." 

SECONDARY EDUCATION. — "It is quite impossible to give here a satisfactory 
abstract of this delightful account of Herbartianism. We can only say that few, 
we think, can read the little book without receiving encouragement, stimulus and 
practical help in their work." 

GLASGOW HERALD. — "Teachers and school board members should read this 
short and vigorous exposition of a very earnest thinker and writer on education." 

WESTMINSTER REVIEW.— "No 'better introduction than this to the study of 
the works of the master could be desired. ' ' 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— "Any one wishing to gain a little knowledge of 
Herbartianism rapidly cannot do better than read The Student's Herbart by Dr. 
F. H. Hayward. The writer has caught some of the enthusiasm of Herbart and 
his followers, but is not blind to their weaknesses, devoting one of his five sections 
to the consideration of them." 

THE GUARDIAN.— " One can only wish that there were equally clear and concise 
monographs on other educationists." 



I 



ill'!] 

1 






